| Author | Message | ||
     Blgg Intermediate Member Username: Blgg Post Number: 192 Registered: 04-2007 Rating: N/A |
First off, the hands are all wrong, in my view (perhaps fat, black baton?). The Cal.11(437)JLC branded movement dates to late48-9(Zafa). All case numbers match. Dial design is correct for late 40s. The dial has me uncertain - is it an old redial? The printing quality is 'factory' class, in my view - SAVE the JLC signature, which is more faded/flaked than the rest of the print, and looks not quite right to my eye - but is that because of the fading? Any comments appreciated.    | ||
| Blgg Intermediate Member Username: Blgg Post Number: 193 Registered: 04-2007 Rating: N/A |
sorry: (Basha) ... perhaps because I was listening to the 'Mothers of Invention' | ||
| Zaf Moderator Username: Zaf Post Number: 4617 Registered: 05-2003 Rating: N/A |
Dial looks like an old redo. Not sure that's the right print anyway, shouldn't it have dagger style markers for that dial style? | ||
| Blgg Intermediate Member Username: Blgg Post Number: 194 Registered: 04-2007 Rating: N/A |
Thanks for your eye. I agree, the dial's not right. I have these hands for it - correct size - sold as NOS for Cal(11). Ideally, they should be the style that includes a luminous insert, I suspect. The closest I can come, now, for a sweep second hand is from an old Powerwind (I think), which terminates in a (too small) circle, and with additional flourish other side of hole, snipped down.  | ||
| Blgg Intermediate Member Username: Blgg Post Number: 195 Registered: 04-2007 Rating: N/A |
... or perhaps do you mean 'dagger' hands as in 'dagger dial' Reversos and rectangles - which were 'Dauphine?' | ||
| Zaf Moderator Username: Zaf Post Number: 4619 Registered: 05-2003 Rating: N/A |
I think for the dial you have that hand style is OK, though they'd probably be in gilt most often. |