Hi Gents, I saw this piece online. I haven't seen one before. Does anybody know something about this piece ? Gr Goedie
YUP, if it's real, it is expensive.. That's all I got on this one. After a quick image search, most of these seem to have come as TRICOMPAX. Can't wait to hear more about this one.
The dial does not look good, the subdials appear off center and the script looks poor. Would like to see better photos.
This was made very late UG, when they stopped using Martel movements. I forgot what movement they had - but a lot of companies used the exact same caliber and dial layout. I'd be surprised if it was solid gold. I think it's gold plated. That being said, I do believe UG made the best design out of what they had. But don't think this is some unique design by them. Cheaper watch than earlier stuff.
Ah! Well that's certainly something. I don't think other companies typically made these 18k - and I think other examples of this UG reference didn't come in 18k. Cool to know. Nice to see.
Something feels wrong there, the watch dial is from very late UG post martel (1960+) while the case back logo seems to be from 1930s....
Yes, OP - I would advise you ask for pictures of the caseback and the case together. ELV has a point. I saw that, but didn't say anything because I don't know what logo they used in the very late era - but he's right. Something smells odd. As I said - I usually see these as gold plated.
The picture of the caseback was sent to me by the guy who bought the watch. I know him personally and this is the casebook from the watch pictured.
I am not saying it is all correct. To be honest I have no bloody idea, haha. That is why I asked you guys.
What I'm saying is that if that caseback fits the watch in question, it's likely correct. The watch is legit. A random caseback produced 40 years earlier would not fit on this watch, in all likelihood, beyond other consideration. So as long as the caseback is indeed the caseback for that watch (as you say it is), it's correct - but not some diamond in the rough creation of UG.
Something feels wrong with this one, for me too. The dial looks like a redial. The case looks too perfect, possibly fake. The crown is almost definitely not original, which would mean someone has been working on this watch, even if there are no service marks in the case back. Why do we have a case back photo but no movement photo? I just can't get excited about this one.
I've seen this watch reference before. This is not a fake. Not common - but they don't often command as high prices as Martel UG's. How can the case be too perfect? This watch was made very late UG. Design control was not as great as it was in the past. Crown and dials... it's of a different era of UG.
