| Author | Message | ||
     Hex Onx New member Username: Hexonx Post Number: 25 Registered: 09-2005 Rating: N/A |
The minute hand dial looks like a rough fake or redone. The description insists this is NOS and the dial is not repainted etc. However, the dots on the minute hand dial are out of alignment and dissapear like a poor copy. Any opinions out there? Just curious but not interested enough to bid. http://tinyurl.com/bdj3p | ||
| Hex Onx New member Username: Hexonx Post Number: 26 Registered: 09-2005 Rating: N/A |
I took a second look and it appears that the clear second hand dial is not perfectly round but a rough round, not true. This mixes with the edges of the dots dial part. Not very original looking to me. Looks like a modified memovox. | ||
| Zaf Moderator Username: Zaf Post Number: 1628 Registered: 05-2003 Rating: N/A |
I think the watch is genuine, but it does look like a refinished dial to me. | ||
| GregB Unregistered guest Rating: N/A |
The watch you speak of is mine. I've probably bought/sold 150-200 JLC Mystery Dials over the years and I've had quite a bit of experience looking at these watches. I don't consider myself an expert on very many models, but I feel very comfortable with my expertise on this model. I also have the benefit of examining this watch first-hand under a loupe. The dial is absolutely not refinished. If you had bothered to look, the clues from other pictures would also have supported the claim of originality: 1) See the pristine perfect condition of the movement? Does it look like it has been worn? Any gunk, imperfections, watchmaker marks? Nope. 2) See the pristine inside caseback? See the ink inspection stamp from the factory still intact? See the absence of watchmaker marks or any other imperfections. Does what you see everywhere else on the watch support the fact that it has been unworn? (Yes) Then what would even lead you to believe that the dial on the watch would ever have *needed* to be refinished? I have the benefit of looking at the dial on this watch in person, so there is no doubt in my mind of originality. But for those who don't have the ability to look directly at the watch, you could examine clues from other parts to reinforce the probability that the dial is original... all the clues fit. Hex, you seem to be on a full-time witch hunt on these boards to prove your knowledge about a subject that you, yourself (in other posts) claim to be a beginner at. Perhaps you should refrain from throwing stones at every listing you see until you've learned a little more about watches. Greg | ||
| GregB Unregistered guest Rating: N/A |
BTW, the center disk is perfectly round and equidistant from the minute track, exactly as it should be. Perhaps you don't understand the issue of parallax (look it up), but if you are going to critique pictures and sellers, you should learn about it. None of the pictures are shot from directly in front of the watch because of issues of glare. The watch is tilted slightly back in the first pictures and sideways in later pictures. Since the plastic minute disk hovers a few millimeters over the hour disk and the outer dial track, parallax causes it to look shifted when viewed from any angle except directly above. The dial, the disk, the minute track, etc. are absolutely perfectly round and exactly as they should be. Greg | ||
| Hex Onx New member Username: Hexonx Post Number: 40 Registered: 09-2005 Rating: N/A |
GregB, you seem to take this personally? How ironic. However, how do I know this is the real GregB speaking with all his wisdom?  If this is one of your watches, then maybe you can explain why the description states New Old Stock? OIC, NOS condition. Strange how that can sound so convincing. Maybe I am "witch hunting" or "snipe hunting" if you prefer. It's just one way to learn how not to "be had" if I decide to invest in a vintage collectors item? Books, Cordial discussion boards, manuals, pictures? I read on an Ebay discussion board, "Buy the Seller, not the pictures". Of course I would still want pictures, but if something looks too good or new and it's vintage, I would have to question that. JMO... If one can't have a discussion about what ones opinion or new interests without someone else commenting, no one would gain knowledge or get to know the "seller" and the "quality". Now I do. Glad to meet you GregB. BTW, I realized the center clear dial issue and the way the picture is on an angle did make me start this thread. Now that it's been explained, I'm okay with that. My second post was an attempt to correct that optical illusion. Good luck with your auction. Lastly, good going with all the responses. I realize that some folks are more sensitive than others about there personal interests. I was merely focusing on the vintage and not so vintage items and not the person. Thank you Zaf for your fine discussion board and your responses. I would nominate you for being honest about your opinion and feeling. **** now off I go to do some snow shoveling **** | ||
| GregB Unregistered guest Rating: |
There's nothing wrong with posting an opinion or a *polite* question, but the accusing manner in which you have often raced to call sellers "deceptive" or outright liers would offend even the thickest-skinned recipient. There is no shame in not knowing all the answers or wanting to stimulate a discussion, but a bit of courteous diplomacy should be observed. With regards to the "buy the seller, not the watch", I was the one who coined that saying on the boards and I'm happy that so many have picked it up and are spreading the advice. Its good to ask questions and I'll always respond promptly with all I know. Again, a little diplomacy goes a long way. Greg | ||
| Hex Onx New member Username: Hexonx Post Number: 55 Registered: 09-2005 Rating: N/A |
Okay GregB, Phred, RP13245, whatever. In your own mind, you might have thought that, but in reality I didn't mention any of your post above... Have a nice day. |
