artisgil
·Picked this one up recently at a very favorable price and overall I’m quite pleased with it. The watch is running well and timing on the timegrapher shows it averaging about 30 seconds per day, which I consider very respectable given the age and the fact that it’s a manual-wind movement.
The one mechanical issue is that the alarm hand is currently not functioning, so I plan to have that addressed during a future service. Otherwise, amplitude and beat appear stable and it’s been reliable on the wrist.
As for originality, I believe the dial is original, though I’m open to informed opinions. What caught my attention is that this dial configuration seems far less common than the more frequently seen Cricket variants—I personally haven’t encountered this exact dial layout often, if at all, until recently.
I’d appreciate any constructive thoughts, particularly from those who have handled similar examples or can comment on period-correct dial details.
The one mechanical issue is that the alarm hand is currently not functioning, so I plan to have that addressed during a future service. Otherwise, amplitude and beat appear stable and it’s been reliable on the wrist.
As for originality, I believe the dial is original, though I’m open to informed opinions. What caught my attention is that this dial configuration seems far less common than the more frequently seen Cricket variants—I personally haven’t encountered this exact dial layout often, if at all, until recently.
I’d appreciate any constructive thoughts, particularly from those who have handled similar examples or can comment on period-correct dial details.
