Forums Latest Members
  1. ortope Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    348
    Likes
    578
    I found this watch on the Bay.
    But what is wrong with it?

    Kind regards

    s-l1600-4.jpg s-l1600-2.jpg s-l1600.jpg s-l1600-3.jpg s-l1600-1.jpg
     
  2. JanV Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    907
    Likes
    2,467
    So what do you want to know?
    There can be no answers without questions.
    What are your own observations?
     
    alexkovac88 and Davidt like this.
  3. Screwbacks Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    1,682
    Likes
    4,857
    it has all the box and papers. so the only thing possibly wrong with it on ebay would be the price.:D
     
  4. Ville_W Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    241
    Likes
    2,434
    I can’t find that anything is obvious wrong. Case is polished which I personally don’t like since it doesn’t match the overall condition of the watch
     
  5. ortope Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    348
    Likes
    578
    Look at the bezel, it is not centered and it is a "220"...
     
  6. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    Well it appears to be a late 1970s/early 80s Speedy with not especially nice hand patina. If it is claimed to be earlier than yes there is something wrong.
     
  7. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    Re the 220, That’s a well known feature from some 1970 production. The dial isn’t right for a 220 as it has no step and has the long S. One or other was likely changed. What year is on the papers? You haven’t given us much.
     
    Edited Sep 8, 2019
    Spacefruit likes this.
  8. ortope Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    348
    Likes
    578
    The "220" bezel insert was only used, as far as I could find out, for a short period of time on the ref. 145.022-69 from October to December, last quarter 1970.
     
    jeppehh likes this.
  9. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    See above. So what’s your question? You haven’t given us anything to go on but presumably have a seller description.
     
    Davidt likes this.
  10. ortope Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    348
    Likes
    578
    The question was "What is wrong with this 145.022?".
    Clearly a "220" bezel has nothing to do on a watch that seems to be a 145.022-76, being the insert only used for a very short period of time at the end of 1970. Furthermore the "60" is not exactly centered...
    It could also be a 145.022-69 with the correct serial number with a later dial, but in this case also the case back and the band would be wrong.
     
  11. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    Why a 76 and not a 78?

    Ah so it was a test? Great but not exactly fair since you had the caseback and papers to go on!

    I agree from what you say it’s a late 70s watch with a swapped 220 bezel.
     
  12. ortope Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    348
    Likes
    578
    The dial with the specifications of the one on the watch were mounted from 1976 on (source MWO).
     
  13. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    Yep but my question is why a -76 specifically? That dial was in use from 1977 to 1990 and used on the -76, -78, 145.022, 145.0022.

    If you are going to be pedantic be right!
     
    alexkovac88 and Speedimaster like this.
  14. omegastar Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    1,836
    Likes
    5,323
    As far as I know it could be a 68 transitional with the wrong dial and the wrong bezel !
     
  15. ortope Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    348
    Likes
    578
    I found the beginning of the serial number 45.xxx.xxx
     
  16. padders Oooo subtitles! Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    8,982
    Likes
    13,922
    So a -78 or later model then in fact based on the serial...
     
  17. ortope Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    348
    Likes
    578
    I meant at least a 145.022-76.
     
  18. Davidt Sep 8, 2019

    Posts
    10,399
    Likes
    18,075
    Is this a query or a little game/test? Starting to look like a strange thread.
     
    MoclovFlop, JanV and padders like this.
  19. Matth84 Sep 15, 2019

    Posts
    151
    Likes
    74
  20. squarelug Sep 15, 2019

    Posts
    245
    Likes
    181
    Yeah, I can't tell if it's just that the photos could be better of if the patina is the unattractive kind