Hi fellow UG enthusiasts, what do you think of these two Tricompax? First one: Dial looks correct, but the hands are replacements, relume? https://www.chrono24.hk/universalgenve/tri-compax--id10408437.htm Second One: Not the correct crown, case? https://www.chrono24.hk/universalgenve/tricompax--id11492532.htm
both dials are legit. the steel one has relumed hands. not a big deal if price takes this into account, imho. the gold case looks ok but you've to check the inner caseback. gold crown is of course not correct but even in this case I won't pass for a nice piece, for a lack of a crown. be elastic.
I'm assuming the judgement on relumed hands is because they're just TOO perfect and the dial lume isn't? The gold crown is not correct because it's signed? Not sure how you're saying that the dial is legit though. Doesn't the tachy scale on the 12552 look smudgy, particularly around the bottom half (140, in particular)?
No, I won't say that. Accordingly to what we are saying in the other thread the steel one has a service dial, authentic but service. I still have to know how "minus" is this stuff. Anyway the tachy scale on the gold one looks pretty decent to me. Crown should not be signed, yes. Yes, hands looks relumed because (service) dial has a medium-strong patina and they are like.. brand new. Overall it's a watch that looks like he had a uproarious life! Relumed hands, service dial etc. TriCompaxes are not rare, I'd pass on that one. A crown missing is a thing, all this stuff is another thing. Of course always considering price request. Maybe seller is asking 500$, in that case I'd buy it! (just joking of course).
My 22242 certainly had such a life. Royal artillery. Not issued but the original owner thought to etch initials and number... I’d never part with it.
My point exactly. Yes Service dial and Moon but a nice Tri with an interesting provenance non the less.
That's very easy to spot & remember. Any chance it's always true or are there rules like, its only true if older than 1951 in a steel case with alpha hands?
a dial is a dial, its originality does not depend of the case of the watch. we can say that these dials: 1) no line between tri and compax words 2) 32mm? (I don't remember exactly but there's a thread about it) 3) arabic numerals / dots filled with radium are service dials. this does not means that it's a minus, at least... they are original, 100% original. UG world is not Rolex world so.. MAYBE there are also other service dials but so far this is the only spotted.
I am a bit late to the party here. Do you want to buy or are you just educating yourself? I the former, what about this one? https://www.chrono24.com/universalgenve/287-tri-compax-universal-geneve--id8045461.htm Price is much better. Pics could be better, but it seems to have a nice dial. Pushers are good, case could be a bit plished. Crown is newer but UG. Only the hands are a bit rusty but a good watchmaker can fix this.
I am seeking for a nice decent Tri for my collection. Correct me if I am wrong, but the hour subdial is a replacement? The bolder numerals seems a bit jumpy to me.
If I remember well, the consensus was that short tails can also occur on original dials when the hyphen is in place. short tails with hyphen = factory short tails without hyphen = service
So the Steel is serviced dial (without hyphen + short tails on 9) and the gold example is factory? (with hyper + short tail on 9)