Sherpa Graph Mark I - a fine white-dialed watch with a later case back

[Joe_A]

Note: Thread title change.

From time to time, we see watches that we may wish to acquire, but I also find it interesting to identify watches that are unusual and may be genuine - or not.

This one is made of genuine components, but . . .

It seems to me to be a Mark Ic in all respects except that it appears to have a Mark IV case. It is listed as a Mark II, so perhaps the seller is "averaging the references."

I'm curious about what the more knowledgeable among us think . . .



It's described as a Mark II with 1963 production year.

My later Mark Id is stamped June of 1962, so this watch is (mostly) an early 1962 watch with radium luminous.

The coppery movement is correct for a Mark I watch, with weighted balance and fixed stud carrier:



(click to enlarge)

But, here is the case back:



It's hard to tell to to a certainly, but the S/N appears to be 1261603, which fits right in with the range Nico has identified for a Mark IV.

I don't actually see the leading 1 and the "3" is a best guess.

If the leading number were a 2, then the watch would be numbered earlier than the earliest Mark Is that Nico has identified, so the 1 is likely there.



Thoughts?

~ Joe

Listing here:

Enicar Sherpa Graph 072-02-01 | Ref. 072-02-01 Watches on Chrono24

Find low prices for 13 Enicar ref. 072-02-01 watches on Chrono24. Compare deals and buy a ref. 072-02-01 watch.

www.chrono24.com

 

[JimJupiter]

I follow your guess. Its not just the serial, its also the REference Number 072-02-01 which is no MK1 or MK 2 territory . I guess someone changed the caseback some time ago, willingly or not. Its a shame, since the front is very nice!

Nico

 

[RossMcDermidPGA]

Dear Joe_A and JimJupiter, thank you so much for your post about my Sherpa Graph!
Yep it’s mine!
Looks like I have made a few silly errors in my listing on Chrono 24!
I very much appreciate your expert views and information about the model and serial numbers.
I should have posted a few questions on the forum before I listed it

Anyhoo I have now amended the listing and after checking the serial number on the case it is as you both identified….definitely one of the later Mk IV’s, but I am also curious as to how so many late Mk 1 parts ended up inside this watch….?
I bought it from Andrea Foffi in Rome a while ago and I must admit I didn’t ask many questions as to it’s provenance, I just loved the look of it

The watch certainly has a hidden history so I can only guess it was repaired by substituting a later case design (or vice versa)?

Thanks again for posting about it….love the Enicar Forum! all the very best, Ross

 

[Joe_A]

Hello Ross,

To my eye, your watch looks like a genuine Mark I most likely from late 1961 or early 1962. The dial and hands look like radium luminous was used which has aged gray or grayish in color. All hands, crown and pushers look correct for the period.

It is Nico who is the resident expert here and according to his research, he would most likely call this a Mark Ib or Mark Ic. The only dfference appears to be the serial number on the clover-leaf style case back with reference 1308 BaNCH. Here, we cannot dtermine the original serial number.

It appears as if the case back is the only part of the watch which has been replaced at some point with a case from 1967 or later. Perhaps the original case back was badly damaged or lost?

It's a beautiful watch with the one identified flaw.

If Nico were to contradict me, then please ignore me.

Regards,

Joe

 

[JimJupiter]

No Joe, absolutly correct. I think the caseback was changed in time. If it was the whole case, I wouldn't matter. There are no differences in the middle case since the MK1b (or I havnt seen them yet ).

Still, this watch is a real beauty and everything apart from the caseback looks correct to me. So everything that matters when you look on it on your wrist . I know guys, who would kill for a dial like this

Best Nico

 

[Joe_A]

Changed the thread title to reflect more accurately the offering.

 

[RossMcDermidPGA]

Dear Joe, Nico and Jim, thank you so much for your expert insight on my Sherpa Graph. So much appreciated,

 

[mgernhar]

so is this a franken watch

 

[RossMcDermidPGA]

Yes it’s impossible to know how my Sherpa Graph was made into its current configuration? (Franken’d or not?)

(a) It could have been originally created in the Enicar factory as a Mark 4, but using the majority of parts in a mark 1?
(A possible Enicar ‘parts bin special’?)

(b) it is a Mark 1, but at one time has received a new case back from a mark 4? (Most likely option)

(c) some talented watchmaker has put a Mark 1 Sherpa Graph into a Mark 4 case?

But most importantly…..regardless how it got to this state….it does look superb!

 

[SteveHarris]

My guess would be B. Back in the 70's and 80's watchmakers and owners were not quite as OCD as we are about correctness and keeping things original. Perhaps the caseback was damaged somehow when they tried to removed it or there were two Graphs on the bench that day and a mixup was made. Who knows.

 

[RossMcDermidPGA]

Thanks Steve! Yep (b) it is……

anyone out there seen a Sherpa Graph Mk 4 with a Mk 1 case back?
It’s time for a re-union!

 

[jbcollier]

Repair techs/watch owners try to open the Enicar compressor watch backs with the incorrect tools. They apply a lot of pressure in the hope it will work.

I hear sometimes it does

I see it often doesn't.

The combination of pressure and the wrong tool means deep gouges in the case back when the tool slips. I'm sure your incorrect back was viewed as a lucky find at the time.

It is what it is: a very nice watch with a minor flaw. Enjoy!

PS: If at anytime you feel overwhelmed with shame at having a watch with a newer back, I'm willing to sacrifice my future mental well-being and buy said watch at a reasonable discount... ;-)

 

[RossMcDermidPGA]

Hi Jim…..thanks for your message and expert insight, much appreciated!

What a bunch of pillocks! Imagine someone using the wrong tool and the wrong method to remove a compressor case back! Absolute Sacrilege!

But……I’m starting to now view this Mark 4 case-back ‘flaw’ similarly to Cindy Crawford’s mole!

A flaw possibly yes……but the rest is simply stunning all the same!

In fact…..I think I might just hold on to ‘Cindy’ for now but rest-assured I will certainly take into account your mental stability (or lack of ) before I offer you a healthy discount!

Thanks Jim!

 

[mgernhar]

No Joe, absolutly correct. I think the caseback was changed in time. If it was the whole case, I wouldn't matter. There are no differences in the middle case since the MK1b (or I havnt seen them yet ).

Still, this watch is a real beauty and everything apart from the caseback looks correct to me. So everything that matters when you look on it on your wrist . I know guys, who would kill for a dial like this

Best Nico

So what does an incorrect case do to the value of the watch? I would think it would really hurt the value, but i am a novice at this. It seems to me that the premium prices only would apply to 100% correct watches. What would a 100% correct mk 1 sherpa graph go for?

 

[jbcollier]

It’s not an incorrect case. It has a newer replacement back. I assume the original back was all scratched up. Whether you view that as a repair or a flaw is up to you.

 

[mgernhar]

its a very nice watch. if had the original caseback would it be worth alot more? I see these watches at a pretty wide range of prices. there were a couple really nice mk3 and mk4 on the chrono 24 that sold instantly. then there is a website whose names escapes me but they are asking 50k for mk1s. I personally like the look of the mk3 they best, with the paddle hands and the lollipop second hand, even better with a BOR bracelet.

 

[mgernhar]

Dear Joe_A and JimJupiter, thank you so much for your post about my Sherpa Graph!
Yep it’s mine!
Looks like I have made a few silly errors in my listing on Chrono 24!
I very much appreciate your expert views and information about the model and serial numbers.
I should have posted a few questions on the forum before I listed it

Anyhoo I have now amended the listing and after checking the serial number on the case it is as you both identified….definitely one of the later Mk IV’s, but I am also curious as to how so many late Mk 1 parts ended up inside this watch….?
I bought it from Andrea Foffi in Rome a while ago and I must admit I didn’t ask many questions as to it’s provenance, I just loved the look of it

The watch certainly has a hidden history so I can only guess it was repaired by substituting a later case design (or vice versa)?

Thanks again for posting about it….love the Enicar Forum! all the very best, Ross

there is a mk1d for sale on chrono 24 now that looks like everything is correct

 

[Joe_A]

Hello mgernhar,

Yes, I believe that the new "1d" for sale on Chrono24 - also listed on Instagram - is offered up by our own Steve Harris!

Steve can correct me if I got this wrong.

I have come to realize that, if I want to know what is going on up to the minute, I have to check Instagram more often than I check the usual websites I visit daily . . .

. . . or else I will find myself in the: "When you snooze; you lose" category of collectors.

It's a nice 1d and only 32 numbers away from the S/N of my own 1d.

~ Joe

 

[mgernhar]

Cool seems like a pretty fair price in the sense that the other one D that has the wrong case back just asking more but I'm really just assessing this market now what do you think that's a decent price? I really like these watches with the Bor band. I think it really makes them look much xtronger

 

[Joe_A]

Cool seems like a pretty fair price in the sense that the other one D that has the wrong case back just asking more but I'm really just assessing this market now what do you think that's a decent price? I really like these watches with the Bor band. I think it really makes them look much xtronger

The other one you see listed is actually an earlier watch, possibly a Ib or Ic, but with a Mark IV case back. One will likely never know the serial number of that watch.

Opinions vary and I don't wish to hurt anyone or be seen as hurting anyone by offering an opinion as to what one particular watch may be worth. When it comes right down to it, any watch is worth what someone is willing to pay for it and as Nico has suggested, pay attention to the sold prices on Ebay. That's where you may get a pretty good indication of the market price for watches in general.

I'll offer up this much, purely as one man's opinion.

All things being equal, such as overall condition, a more desirable collector/investor watch is one where, as far as anyone is able to tell, all the parts are either original to the watch or coetaneous - made at the same time.

That said, many watch-buying decisions are made with emotion, so if someone falls in love with a specific watch and understands and accepts whatever issues it may have and chooses to buy it "as is" anyway, well that's fine for them.

I prefer the Id not only because the price is more attractive, but because it appears completely genuine. The Id for sale and my watch were probably assembled by the same person or persons on or about June of 1962 . . . as they are only 32 serial numbers apart and both are stamped 6-62. The original fingerprints are long gone by now though so we can't know for sure.