Serial doesn’t match up

[Lol-x]

The "S"es in STAINLESS look off by quite a bit.

The top half of the "S" is much bigger than the bottom half. Its way out of proportion to what you would normally expect to see.

[1665fan]

Soo again have you contacted the original seller and who was it???? Time to put the cards on the table….the watch is BS

[linesiders]

This is why I suggested for full serial, ref, and caseback stamps. The fonts are suspect and sloppy in the wrong places - perfect fonts are suspect too. Having the full serial can show additional mistakes on the engraving.

Without opening a can of worms, I have seen a handful of suspect and likely fake cases on a major site or two.

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by linesiders

This is why I suggested for full serial, ref, and caseback stamps. The fonts are suspect and sloppy in the wrong places - perfect fonts are suspect too. Having the full serial can show additional mistakes on the engraving.

Without opening a can of worms, I have seen a handful of suspect and likely fake cases on a major site or two.

I could really use help evaluating my engravings, but it is really hard to take close up pics.

[linesiders]

Get a Moment lens and case for your smart phone and a lot of trial and error ; )

Zoom and remote shutter also help

[southtexas]

Here’s another 1680 2.9 mil serial:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

The "S"es in STAINLESS look off by quite a bit.

The top half of the "S" is much bigger than the bottom half. Its way out of proportion to what you would normally expect to see.

That’s what I noticed too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[pereztroika]

Originally Posted by MrChamfers

I could really use help evaluating my engravings, but it is really hard to take close up pics.

From what I can see they look alright.

Cheers
Jose

[pereztroika]

Originally Posted by southtexas

Here’s another 1680 2.9 mil serial:

These watches were made in batches so within the same batch, the engravings should look more or less the same. Since they were engraved by hand, there can be slight deviations but these are usually within certain tolerances.

You cannot compare 2.4 to 2.9 mil. Different story.


Cheers
Jose

[alwayshere]

Originally Posted by MrChamfers

I could really use help evaluating my engravings, but it is really hard to take close up pics.

sorry to go off topic but you found a 1680! good one!

[77T]

Originally Posted by MrChamfers

I could really use help evaluating my engravings, but it is really hard to take close up pics.

So hard to say anything definitive due to the resolution of those photos.

I tried to sharpen them up a bit…





Of course, it may go without saying, but…
Engravings are not the only thing to evaluate if you have concerns about your watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by pereztroika

These watches were made in batches so within the same batch, the engravings should look more or less the same. Since they were engraved by hand, there can be slight deviations but these are usually within certain tolerances.

You cannot compare 2.4 to 2.9 mil. Different story.


Cheers
Jose

Just saying a general thanks for sharing your experience.

I have often used your website discussion on vintage Daytona case engravings and the two types of fonts used in the engraving days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by 77T

So hard to say anything definitive due to the resolution of those photos.

I tried to sharpen them up a bit…





Of course, it may go without saying, but…
Engravings are not the only thing to evaluate if you have concerns about your watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

thanks

The dial and bracelet look good btw, I'll have the movement checked out at Ridley.

[southtexas]

Originally Posted by pereztroika

These watches were made in batches so within the same batch, the engravings should look more or less the same. Since they were engraved by hand, there can be slight deviations but these are usually within certain tolerances.

You cannot compare 2.4 to 2.9 mil. Different story.


Cheers
Jose

That’s correct. I was posting to provide another data point, and to show another pointed “A” example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MrChamfers]

Mine is from 79 and the A looks flat though it is barely visible in the pic
Macro lense is on the way!

[baumare]

Originally Posted by pereztroika

These watches were made in batches so within the same batch, the engravings should look more or less the same. Since they were engraved by hand, there can be slight deviations but these are usually within certain tolerances.

You cannot compare 2.4 to 2.9 mil. Different story.


Cheers
Jose

Obviously I wanna also thank you for your participation, I'm also a follower!

For what I know the engraving where done by hand using a Pantograph machine, I believe they where following a template, so it could be a change of the template during those year and the A went from flat to pointy

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by alwayshere

sorry to go off topic but you found a 1680! good one!

Thanks - it looks like a nice one.