Presently, there is a Zenith 156H for sale on the forum. The dial is described as original but there are a number of elements that suggest, to me, that it is a redial. The most obvious issues are the atpyical fonts and poor execution of the sub-dials. Further below are two original examples for comparison. Other issues include the fonts of the tachymeter scale and seconds/minutes scale. I would be curious to hear what others think of the dial.

Here is the listing: https://omegaforums.net/threads/vintage-zenith-156h-chronograph-19529.153193/

137601, 19529


144421, 19529

https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/fs-rare-zenith-rosegold-oversize-156h-movement-eu.4749455/

141300, 19529

https://www.analogshift.com/products/zenith-chronograph

 

Upside-down star and closed 6s.

 

I agree, the closed 6s in the sub-dials do not look correct. Regarding the upside-down star, this example comes to mind.


https://omegaforums.net/threads/zenith-cal-133-8-bumper.140651/

As I mentioned above, apart from the atpyical fonts, there is the poor execution. In the image below, I have used arrows to point out the inconsistent length of markings in the hour sub-dial. I also circled an inconsistency in the spacing of markings on the seconds/minutes scale.

 

Are the hour, minute, and chrono seconds hands correct? I don't recall that style of hands and they look a little short and thin.

As for the dial: There is also misalignment of the outer track. I have listed comparisons to the other two chronos. The outer track is potentially also not centered.

Watch in question:

Comparison 1:

Comparison 2:


Not centered:

 

Thanks for these good observations! I think that the more we look, the more we'll find.

As for the hour, minute, and chronograph second hands, I do not recall seeing them before on comparable examples. They look incorrect, to me.

 

@Modest_Proposal A thought just came to mind, I have seen these sub-dials on 13ZN redials. Looking at a side-by-side comparison (see further below), it seems as though both dials were done by the same refinisher. Oddly, this style of sub-dial does not appear on original 13ZN dials, and seems to be incorrect for Zenith, as well. I guess that it was chosen because it is realitvely simple?




https://omegaforums.net/threads/13zn-chronographs-inquiries-and-information.32929/page-4#post-548593

 

Nice find!

Less likely the same refinisher (as in the same servicer) than the same refinishing tools and stamps.

 

Agreed.

 

Agree it looks like a redial and wrong hands. Did anyone give the seller a heads up? The last time I started one of these threads I had (a few) people dog piling on me to STFU

 

Thanks for your response. I remember that thread. I have not contacted the seller but I think that would make sense at this point.

 

well, this has certainly been the most humbling (and embarrassing) thread to find. And although I probably would have preferred @DirtyDozen12 bring this to my attention privately, I will also admit I probably would have maintained I thought the dial was original. As someone that generally feels pretty confident about spotting redials, I have happily enjoyed this watch for over two years, with each wear bringing a smile to my face; I suppose ignorance is bliss. I have since removed the FS listing and apologize for the inaccurate listing.

It also goes to show the difference in looking at macros of my poor quality iphone shots to experience on wrist; I never would have suspected since the printing is very sharp, consistent (to the eye), and seems to be even or good quality (for a redial), but damnit if you guys aren't right, this does appear to be a refinished dial, and I cannot argue with the sharp eyes and identifiers above - I certainly feel stupid for not noticing them. Luckily, I "accidentally" won this at an auction with a low bid (now I know why) so it doesn't sting too bad enjoying it because it is a great caliber and charming watch overall, but whether or not I'll be able to look at it the same in the future is the question.

Do any of you experts ever see original dials and hands for this watch? Would it even be worth it to source with a case that's not mint?

 

Admirable response, @gophishin.

 

Apologies to the OP, as this isn’t intended to rub the salt in the wound, more to add another data point to anyone looking at those dials in the future:

another tell tale sign, ie the paint creeping up the sides of what apparently should be an applied «Zenith » signature, as well as an applied « 12 ». The contrast is quite visible with the second photo @DirtyDozen12 posted - the third picture is not defined enough and its angle not the best to see anything.

On a separate note, I would agree with the OP that it is a pretty good redial, esp the sharp subdial edges, and this shows no one is immune from error in that field. One of the greatest collectors of Longines wrote how he always looked through his loupe with trembling hands, fearing the mistakes he might make.

 

There's no reason to be embarrassed, everyone is learning here. I've made exponentially worse mistakes, multiple times, quite publicly.

I think the chance of getting an original dial is low but not impossible. I will keep an eye out and let you know if I come across anything.

 

@gophishin I appreciate your post, thank you.

My last private message about a sales listing went sour so I decided to defer to a moderator's advice and start a thread. In retrospect, I think that it would have been more courteous to notify you of the thread upon starting it, rather than 3 weeks later.

As @bgrisso stated, we are all learning here. So, hopefully, this thread serves as a guide to people, rather than simply highlighting a mistake.

I have also noticed that certain dials look quite good in-hand, and then not so good in photos. I do not know why this is, apart from the obvious difference in magnification.

I have not specifically looked for Zenith 159H dials or hands, but I imagine that they would not be easy to come by.

 

thanks everyone. This is a great thread for someone who wants to learn.