Maurice Lacroix Masterpiece Flyback Chronograph - Bezel Finishing

[ProdigalGil]

Was discussing this piece with my brother this morning and he made a comment and thought I would get other opinions on here. The finishing isn't great he said. Can one tell if the finishing is high quality or not from pics?

Sure I can tell the zaratsu polishing from a Grand Seiko or a Rolex fluted bezel. However, not sure about finishing especially for gold/gold plated by pics.

I was looking at the Maurice Lacroix Flyback Chrono Annual calendar. I have read a few articles and you video review before. I tend to like the steel with 18k gold bezel. The porcelain looking dial with the gold hour marks I find quite attractive.

I found that the piece was originally around $10Kish MSRP, but having checked around now, its depreciated massively to an average under $2-3k and considering I am seeing pieces from 2005ish, almost 15 years, how is finishing then judged?

Here are some google pics I used for judgment:







Would you consider this piece has good finishing?

With flyback and annual calendar and its depreciated value, though 15years old, even if refurbished, and ETA 2892-A2 Top grade based (ML05-3) movement is this piece a steal?

Or is gold bezel and overall finishing as expected to a sub-par for this ML purely due to the time when this was released, i.e., an improvement from ML with modern releases?

I own only steel and white gold pieces, so have no idea of what decent gold finishing....this could be my first one (or put that money on something else).

I can't even tell compare to a nice old Casio I picked up in Japan or even this:


Cheers.

[Justindo]

My wife has a Maurice Lacroix and she likes it and it's an okay watch for what I paid for it new. I'm personally not a big fan of two-tone watches, especially gold plated ones, but if you like the watch and it's in good condition and running well, it's a lot of watch in terms of complications for the money and it's nice looking. Resale on Maurice Lacroix is terrible, but it's probably bottomed out at the price you're suggesting. It's a lot better than the Bulova pictured.

[slcbbrown]

I've worn Rolex since 1974 (1974 rootbeer) and owned an early 80's DJ, 1966 gold DJ, Sub, and my father's 1960 t-bird. I also own three ML Masterpiece models. All three are better finished than any of my Rolex. I can't compare anything to the newest Rolex, because I haven't worn one. The ML that you are looking at has to be the bargain of the decade. I've had my eye on the stainless models.

As to the two tone, ML does this nicely, too.

[ProdigalGil]

Originally Posted by slcbbrown

I've worn Rolex since 1974 (1974 rootbeer) and owned an early 80's DJ, 1966 gold DJ, Sub, and my father's 1960 t-bird. I also own three ML Masterpiece models. All three are better finished than any of my Rolex. I can't compare anything to the newest Rolex, because I haven't worn one. The ML that you are looking at has to be the bargain of the decade. I've had my eye on the stainless models.

As to the two tone, ML does this nicely, too.

Thanks @slcbbrown for the comparisons proposed..his has given me some confidence indeed and hopefully as my collection growths and I get to collect a couple of more pieces that have gold as the bi-precious metal, I will get to learn as I go along what is good/bad finishing. With the vintage comparison, it does show even with the likes of rolex (the root beer is also a beautiful piece by the way), year advancement is indicating better finishing in watches even with the less known consumer brands.

As @Justindo mentioned, a lot of complication for the money, which got me interested in this piece. Never thought I would consider an ML...always get surprised when doing a bit of research when it comes a time to be in the market the next piece.