Hi, i just found this Triple Calendar Moonphase:
http://www.lorologiese.com/us/brand...11303-18kt-gold-c-uantieme-watch-cal-291.html

Found it in Salas Book as well (page 411) in 18ct PINK gold with the same reference (11303). The one of lorogiese looks like yellow gold, am i right?

The hands are looking original to me.

What do you think about the dial? The indices had been put on later, right? So, is it a redial or original?
What do you think about the price...

Thanks

 

Nice redial, no swiss at bottom, Its a small watch. 32.5 mm. I sold one similar two years ago and only got 1400 on the bay. This was just before the new interest in UG.With the redial, and the size unless you like watches on the small unisex side, I think it is overpriced. You may as well look fot a Tricompax fot that kind of money !

 

Wait - redial? Redial? No, I believe this is original.

Indices also appear original. Don't know why you think they don't, OP.

 

It would be the first UG TDM I have ever seen with no swiss at the bottom ? Other than that, it does look original ! The TDM in my avitar had one of the best dials I've have seen, VERY clear swiss printed at the bottom. What do examples look like in Sala's book ?

 

The "Universal Geneve" looks slightly crooked. The 60 on the second track looks fat too. Or am i seeing things?

 

If that is true, than you have not seen many UG calendar watches!

Do not be so dogmatic about the "swiss" at the bottom - especially in the 1940's and even 1950's. There is basically no consistency across the board on any aspect of their dials.

 

Obviously no swiss at the bottom is NOT a total
way to determine the originality, but its a good place to start ?

 

Your wrong, Ive looked at many UG triple date moonphase, Ive had three or four in my collection over the years and have NEVER seen an original one without it. Pictures from the the internet help, but Im talking hands on the watch experience. The one in the picture may be original, but in my opinion they are an anomoly !
What does Sala's book show ?

 

Firstly, your logic isn't following.

Your logic:

Step 1: Look for "swiss" mark. If it is absent, continue to scrutinize.
Step 2: Observe other details of dial.
Observation: All else looks original.
Conclusion: Must be a redial(?!)

It wouldn't be your first step - it would be your only step. Which is flawed logic because examples exist without "swiss".

You can't tell me after owning three or four examples or seeing a few more beyond that of the hundreds of thousands made that you have any degree of confidence in anything. The internet is a far more powerful tool than your collection will ever be.

Sala's book is not scripture, as many tend to believe. I have his book. There are redials in there. And there are mountains of references that are not listed. So let's just put that out there, before I even go looking through the references.

bub838 - I noticed the "60" marker, too, in the left subdial. It is possible that it was retouched there due to fading. Perhaps by the factory, considering the tolerances are so fine. But yes, that is a fair point.

 

Case repolished with sandpaper...

 

Swiss writing is hidden on this one, OP's watch in question might just be the same

 

Also possible! You should ask the seller.

 

Also for me original.My 21302:

 

Andre .... connecting the dots is your specialty!

 

Thank you all for the answers. I have an triple calendar as well, also with "Swiss" an the Button, nearly hidden. Mine is 34,5mm... i will ask the seller about the swiss-sign.

Tri-compax would be my first way to go. With my budget of 2500-4000€ i am looking for a tri-compax for a few month. But i didn't find any watch, original, that interested; wether gold nor Steel. Unfortunately.

 

its gonna be tough with your budget to find an unsullied Tri.

 

Salas book says this on this reference:
SWISS


But what is about these metal indices - are these original or were they put on later?

 

I know. Unfortunately. But i have time and I am thankful for every hint in the future...

 

Important: Universal Geneve references do not refer to the dial + case + hands. They specifically refer to the case. That is all. Universal Geneve is infamous for switching up these elements. So if you see 10 variations of a single reference, they could all be correct.

So no, do not take Sala's photo as evidence that the dial's indices were later added. There is no evidence IMO that would lead me to believe they are a later edition. NOR should you take the photo as evidence that "swiss" should be on the dial (though it might be hiding under the bezel in this instance).

 

Ok, thank you. We will see, if there is swiss on it it, when the seller answers.

May be, for me, first i have to find these kind of indices on another tdm to convince me of the originality. I just saw them for the first time and noticed, that they are looking like that they were put on the dial of salas book, because of the exact same shape.