Which Hamilton?

[watch_my_six]

MRC

Yes, I have one and I think there are a handful more owners here. One thing to note about the lugs is that they have a distinct downward slope, possibly to disguise the thickness which is not as apparent in the larger diameter Heuer and Breitling "Chrono-matics". This means that the lugs are well out of the plane of the dial or back which may give odd effects in closeup photos. I've had a quick flick through photos of mine but cannot find decent pictures to illustrate. Perhaps tomorrow I'll dig it out and take photos with a long(-ish) focal length lens and put a straight-edge across the back.

Edit: mine has straight down the line 19mm lugs, which is odd for a Swiss made watch but is actually 3/4inch as Hamilton were still an American company at the time.

Cool, thank you! So do the lugs in the two original examples posted concern you? Or anything else for that matter? I'm leaning toward going with the second example...

Edited: Aug 18, 2024

 

[MRC]

jspdl

Cool, thank you! Do do the lugs in the two original examples I posted concern you?

As I posted earlier the presentation of the first really concerned me. I mentioned the serious damage to the lugs although I put it down to inept strap changing, but now I think it could well be down to someone trying to bend them. The latest photos still worry me. I'm an engineer (well -- was 50 years ago), a numbers guy anyway, but sight plays a part and feel (jizz in bird-watching terms) and that first one still says to me "run away!".

If you go for a chrono-matic Hamilton you'll be wearing something you'll never see on anyone else's wrist, my estimate is less than 1000 made, possibly ~500 in the 4/5 years of production, and a Cal 11 or 12 is a piece of history. Mine had a lot of internal problems but luckily I already knew a watchmaker who understood the Cal 11s and had already serviced some of my 1960s Valjoux watches, so I narrowly escaped paying a noob tax on it, and still wear it regularly.

 

[watch_my_six]

MRC

As I posted earlier the presentation of the first really concerned me. I mentioned the serious damage to the lugs although I put it down to inept strap changing, but now I think it could well be down to someone trying to bend them. The latest photos still worry me. I'm an engineer (well -- was 50 years ago), a numbers guy anyway, but sight plays a part and feel (jizz in bird-watching terms) and that first one still says to me "run away!".

If you go for a chrono-matic Hamilton you'll be wearing something you'll never see on anyone else's wrist, my estimate is less than 1000 made, possibly ~500 in the 4/5 years of production, and a Cal 11 or 12 is a piece of history. Mine had a lot of internal problems but luckily I already knew a watchmaker who understood the Cal 11s and had already serviced some of my 1960s Valjoux watches, so I narrowly escaped paying a noob tax on it, and still wear it regularly.

Ah right, you did already suggest to "buy the seller", and so I have been leaning towards the second one, but the rear shot of it also looked like the lugs might have been "curved" a bit, so I just wanted to make sure that that didn't yield any new "run away" vibes from it (along with the first)?

 

[MRC]

jspdl

It is curious, perhaps these lugs just have that sort of flared shape? This is a shot of the back of the second watch, as well as a number of other examples from across the internet.

Judging the straightness of lugs is very hard from a photo, it heavily depends on the focal length of the lens and the distance from which it's taken. Here is my watch which has straight lugs when measured with the digital caliper.


That first picture was taken from fairly close with the lens at 20mm. And now from further away with the lens at 60mm to give about the same image size and a straightedge to compare.

 

[JwRosenthal]

MRC

Judging the straightness of lugs is very hard from a photo, it heavily depends on the focal length of the lens and the distance from which it's taken. Here is my watch which has straight lugs when measured with the digital caliper.


That first picture was taken from fairly close with the lens at 20mm. And now from further away with the lens at 60mm to give about the same image size and a straightedge to compare.

Yeah- this may be a matter of perspective. I still don’t like those tool marks on watch #1. It would have me looking for a donor case in short order.

 

[watch_my_six]

MRC

Judging the straightness of lugs is very hard from a photo, it heavily depends on the focal length of the lens and the distance from which it's taken. Here is my watch which has straight lugs when measured with the digital caliper.


That first picture was taken from fairly close with the lens at 20mm. And now from further away with the lens at 60mm to give about the same image size and a straightedge to compare.

Very illuminating, thanks!

 

[watch_my_six]

Got the watch! (The second example). I *think* everything looks pretty good, save for the dire need of a movement service (lol), and a crystal polishing/replacement. My concerns going into it were of course the case, which actually looks pretty good (even the chip to the top right lug is barely noticeable to the naked eye).

I also had some concerns about the dial. The good news is that the degraded lume pip at 3 o'clock is also barely noticeable to the naked eye. But what I thought was a piece of debris on the crystal or perhaps the dial looks like it may be a scratch on the dial (above the hands). It's also not very noticeable to the naked eye. What do folks think?

Edited: Aug 21, 2024

 

[JwRosenthal]

The scratch on the dial is a tough one- clearly done by a less than meticulous watchmaker removing the hands for service at some point- but pretty common. If it’s always gonna be something you notice and it bothers you, then nothing else matters and if there is a no questions refund policy, then pull that lever (if you can’t unsee it). If it’s a non-issue to you and you love having it on your wrist right now and aren’t obsessing over it, then enjoy a lovely watch.

 

[watch_my_six]

Anyone know how to identify the correct crystal for this reference? Eg from eBay listings like these? https://www.ebay.com/itm/1961224185...sNcIMKfSOa&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

 

[JwRosenthal]

watch_my_six

Anyone know how to identify the correct crystal for this reference? Eg from eBay listings like these? https://www.ebay.com/itm/1961224185...sNcIMKfSOa&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

Is the crystal cracked? If not a wet sand could get most of the deeper scratches out provided the acrylic is still thick enough.

 

[watch_my_six]

JwRosenthal

Is the crystal cracked? If not a wet sand could get most of the deeper scratches out provided the acrylic is still thick enough.

Not cracked, it just has a couple of deep gouges that I wasn't sure if could be polished out. But do you think these look like they can be, with or without a wet sand?

 

[X350 XJR]

I've cleaned up much worse, it just takes patience. Tape the bezel up well and have at it. I'd start with 320 or 400 although it's hard to tell just how deep it is with this magnification.