Let's analyze another Mark III - Take 2

[Joe_A]

What do we see with this one on Ebay as of today?

1960s Vintage Enicar Sherpa Graph chronograph watch | eBay

This example has been fully serviced by a specialist watchmaker and is running perfectly. It is original, with correct original Enicar signed crowns.

www.ebay.co.uk

I see a Mark III dial with correct hands with the exception of the seconds hand, of course. That red-orange hand really stands out.

Can it be a legitimate variation?

The crown is the shorter variety generally seen on earlier Graphs.

So early crown and late seconds hand.

The case back is in rough shape and I could not ascertain the S/N from the photo.

Edit: Seller identifies the S/N as 908068

Movement?



I'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong with the movement, but generally, there is engraving on the balance wheel cock and this one seems brushed. It may be a normal variation. It is the correct later V.72 with mobile stud carrier.

 

[SteveHarris]

It's one I was actually offered when on the hunt a few months back. He received it in pretty poor shape and has restored it the best he can. Agree on the seconds hand - Nico would be best placed to answer that though. It could well be a legitimate variation.

The other issue I had was on the marks on the right sub-dial and it looks like it may have been re-lumed. I don't have a particular problem with re-luming personally as I'd rather the lume was there rather than crumbled away as long as it's done right.

Steve

 

[Joe_A]

It's a small world and it's not surprising that each watch we find will have a "signature" to it and a history that one or more of us may know something about.

I too have no issue with reluming. I have a "Jim Clark" MC12H at RGM currently which is having the hands relumed. The subject watch seems to have had the hands redone, but the lume on the indices looks to be original.

One of the reasons for posting threads like this one is to provide a learning experience for myself and others. It is not my intention to hurt anyone's sales effort. It's entirely possible one of us will put up a similar thread in future and an expert will post that "the watch looks perfectly fine and original to me," and that may help the seller receive a good offer.

 

[JimJupiter]

In my opinion the second hand is not correct, to early for a watch with paddle hands. We have:

paddle hands - straight second hand
paddle hands - lume dot second hand
paddle hands - red dot second hand
baton hands - red dot second hand
baton hands - triangle second hand (orange / red)

908.xxx range just shows the combination of paddle hands - red dot second hand. First time we see the triangle orange hands is a year later in 1967 in 1.030.xxx range.

Nico

 

[kazrich]

Also, case backs always look worse in pictures but that's a shocker.
Scratched to bits and the owners name and other stuff inscribed.
Though dial looks nice enough.