Mr.Jones
Needs a Life!
Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by Mr.Jones on Jan 4, 2016 0:33:14 GMT -8
Well, the caseback seems to be original... Sorry, but yeah - that one is a 100% Frankenwatch. I hope it was cheap, at least. Did you buy it from eBay, with the description starting that it was a 7002? Maybe you can get your money back...
|
|
|
Post by igniferroque on Jan 4, 2016 5:47:37 GMT -8
I think I have been sold a 7002 with an aftermarket dial, bezel, and bracelet. As far as I can tell, the movement seems original. Also, judging from the engraving on the inside of the caseback, it seems to have been tampered/serviced. If it is mostly aftermarket, I'll just do my homework some more for the next purchase. Please enlighten me :-/ . EDIT: The movement is actually a 7009A... seems like I have been duped with a frankenwatch. Full of low quality fake parts, it looks very much like the first one I bought before I figured out what I was doing. Read the buyers guides and hang out here looking at way too many watch photos and you'll be on your way before too long.
|
|
|
Post by olironcheeks on Jan 4, 2016 10:00:58 GMT -8
Well, the caseback seems to be original... Sorry, but yeah - that one is a 100% Frankenwatch. I hope it was cheap, at least. Did you buy it from eBay, with the description starting that it was a 7002? Maybe you can get your money back... I bought it from eBay for a solid buck and the description states it is a "real rare 7002-7000." The seller was reasoning that even though the description states that, the pictures say otherwise and I would have known that the movement wasn't a 7002 if I, "looked at it deeply." Don't you think that's a fallacy?
|
|
Mr.Jones
Needs a Life!
Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by Mr.Jones on Jan 4, 2016 13:34:40 GMT -8
If you've payed with PayPal, I'd open a case. Stating one thing and then claiming that it's clearly otherwise, because "The little writing on the picture said so" - no way.
|
|
|
Post by olironcheeks on Jan 5, 2016 8:10:50 GMT -8
If you've payed with PayPal, I'd open a case. Stating one thing and then claiming that it's clearly otherwise, because "The little writing on the picture said so" - no way. We came to terms for a full refund including shipping. The seller still believed his reasoning until the end .
|
|
Mr.Jones
Needs a Life!
Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by Mr.Jones on Jan 5, 2016 8:58:55 GMT -8
Very good! Make sure you ship it trackable, so he can't pull your leg stating that nothing arrived...
|
|
eeki
Timekeeper
Posts: 510
|
Post by eeki on Jan 7, 2016 2:05:52 GMT -8
Greetings from absolutely freezing Finland! For my first post here, I would like to see what you experts think of this one I came across while searching for 6139 Seikos: r.ebay.com/tg2fxqIt is advertised as a 6139-6001, but to my untrained eye it has some issues, first thing being that it is not actually a 6139-6001. The caseback does say 6139-6001 "WATERPROOF" with serial 086782. The dial looks to be a lot newer - reminds me of the later 6139-600x JDM dials. Can you identify where the case and dial are from? What am I looking at?
|
|
Mr.Jones
Needs a Life!
Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by Mr.Jones on Jan 7, 2016 2:10:48 GMT -8
My best guess would be over-polished 6139-7060, but I have not seen these in yellow...
|
|
eeki
Timekeeper
Posts: 510
|
Post by eeki on Jan 7, 2016 7:23:06 GMT -8
My best guess would be over-polished 6139-7060, but I have not seen these in yellow... Thanks, that looks like it! "Over-polished" seems like an understatement here, the case is almost beyond recognition. I actually kind of like the yellow dial, maybe another one would pop up at some time, I might just be interested - unless it's a redial.
|
|
guidok
Can't Tell Time
Posts: 7
|
Post by guidok on Jan 7, 2016 18:57:46 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2016 19:58:13 GMT -8
That seller is one to stay away from for many of the reasons you've just posted.
|
|
Mr.Jones
Needs a Life!
Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by Mr.Jones on Jan 8, 2016 4:51:29 GMT -8
He is known to mix and match, and he doesn't describe what has been done to a watch. The particular one you mentioned has an AM dial and the hands are more like "eh, it's close enough"... Bracelets are almost every time not the original ones, but at least that he mentions. Edit: Looking for pictures of "original" Pandas, I found this forum sale from 2011, which looks A LOT like the one he's selling now, so this particular jumble of parts is going on for a while at least... forum.atgvintagewatches.com/showthread.php?3382-FS-1975-Seiko-6138-8020-quot-Panda-quot-new-price
|
|
|
Post by seikosthlm on Jan 9, 2016 9:35:46 GMT -8
Hi. Got a trade in the other day. A 6309-7040 from 1985. Never did the homework on The model so now asking for help. Think it is safe to say that the insert is non 6309 but what about the dial and hands? Attachments:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2016 9:41:30 GMT -8
Hi. Got a trade in the other day. A 6309-7040 from 1985. Never did the homework on The model so now asking for help. Think it is safe to say that the insert is non 6309 but what about the dial and hands? The bezel insert is genuine and almost definitely came on the watch when new. Some of the earlier watches had this fading to grey/silver happen with a lot of exposure to the sun. It is consistent with the 'water 150m resist' text which was originally redish orange and has now faded to light grey. I'm not sure if the hands are original though; they look to be from an SKX model or perhasps aftermarket.
|
|
|
Post by seikosthlm on Jan 9, 2016 9:44:21 GMT -8
Hi. Got a trade in the other day. A 6309-7040 from 1985. Never did the homework on The model so now asking for help. Think it is safe to say that the insert is non 6309 but what about the dial and hands? The bezel insert is genuine and almost definitely came on the watch when new. Some of the earlier watches had this fading to grey/silver happen with a lot of exposure to the sun. It is consistent with the 'water 150m resist' text which was originally redish orange and has now faded to light grey. I'm not sure if the hands are original though; they look to be from an SKX model or perhasps aftermarket. Thank you. Good news! I love the insert. Any thoughts on the dial?
|
|
|
Post by yonsson on Jan 9, 2016 10:17:26 GMT -8
Hi. Got a trade in the other day. A 6309-7040 from 1985. Never did the homework on The model so now asking for help. Think it is safe to say that the insert is non 6309 but what about the dial and hands? Perhaps some more info is in order since I was the one sending it back to the seller "seikosthlm" because I didn't think it looked right. Dial: Day/date window is only slightly chamfered. See pic below showing "seikosthlm"s watch underneath a pic of my previous 7040 which had a larger chamfer: Lume is dead after charge, no lume whatsoever. Color of day display doesn't match color of date display, day is also slightly raised. Hands: Lume on the hands is fading towards grey, especially the minute hand, they glow in the dark but the dial is completely dead, even after light charge. They are glossy and not as sharp as I'm used to. Insert: Add that the bezel inlay doesn't slant like it should, has a silver color on the edge side (not black as is usual). Glass: No chamfer, not completely flat. More pics: So am I sure dial, insert and hands have been changed? No, but it doesn't add up with other 7040s I've handled. Edit: He sold it to me without having the time to inspect it and didn't want payment before I had had the time to check it myself so no fault of his if it turns out the watch isn't OK. Would deal with him again in a heartbeat. And as I said before returning it, I'm not sure there is something wrong with the watch, I just feel it doesn't comply with my previous 7040.
|
|
|
Post by seikosthlm on Jan 9, 2016 10:45:47 GMT -8
Hi. Got a trade in the other day. A 6309-7040 from 1985. Never did the homework on The model so now asking for help. Think it is safe to say that the insert is non 6309 but what about the dial and hands? Perhaps some more info is in order since I was the one sending it back to the seller "seikosthlm" because I didn't think it looked right. Dial: Day/date window is only slightly chamfered. See pic below showing "seikosthlm"s watch underneath a pic of my previous 7040 which had a larger chamfer: Lume is dead after charge, no lume whatsoever. Color of day display doesn't match color of date display, day is also slightly raised. Hands: Lume on the hands is fading towards grey, especially the minute hand, they glow in the dark but the dial is completely dead, even after light charge. They are glossy and not as sharp as I'm used to. Insert: Add that the bezel inlay doesn't slant like it should, has a silver color on the edge side (not black as is usual). Glass: No chamfer, not completely flat. More pics: So am I sure dial, insert and hands have been changed? No, but it doesn't add up with other 7040s I've handled. Hi. Got a trade in the other day. A 6309-7040 from 1985. Never did the homework on The model so now asking for help. Think it is safe to say that the insert is non 6309 but what about the dial and hands? Perhaps some more info is in order since I was the one sending it back to the seller "seikosthlm" because I didn't think it looked right. Dial: Day/date window is only slightly chamfered. See pic below showing "seikosthlm"s watch underneath a pic of my previous 7040 which had a larger chamfer: Lume is dead after charge, no lume whatsoever. Color of day display doesn't match color of date display, day is also slightly raised. Hands: Lume on the hands is fading towards grey, especially the minute hand, they glow in the dark but the dial is completely dead, even after light charge. They are glossy and not as sharp as I'm used to. Insert: Add that the bezel inlay doesn't slant like it should, has a silver color on the edge side (not black as is usual). Glass: No chamfer, not completely flat. More pics: So am I sure dial, insert and hands have been changed? No, but it doesn't add up with other 7040s I've handled. Thanks for the additional information. Could I add that i did not charge for the watch in advance since I wasnt sure about it. Also thanks for letting me use your pic.
|
|
|
Post by yonsson on Jan 9, 2016 10:52:33 GMT -8
Thanks for the additional information. Could I add that i did not charge for the watch in advance since I wasnt sure about it. Also thanks for letting me use your pic. Sorry for not adding that, I wrote my post while I was in a hurry, I don't fault you at all since you sent it to me without having the time to inspect it and also gave me an "open return, pay if satisfied". Added the info to my original post but you were too fast for me. I'd also like to add that I'm not sure I'm right, I have been known to be wrong before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2016 17:55:19 GMT -8
The bezel insert is genuine and almost definitely came on the watch when new. Some of the earlier watches had this fading to grey/silver happen with a lot of exposure to the sun. It is consistent with the 'water 150m resist' text which was originally redish orange and has now faded to light grey. I'm not sure if the hands are original though; they look to be from an SKX model or perhaps aftermarket. Thank you. Good news! I love the insert. Any thoughts on the dial? The dial is original. All the fonts are correct; the date window has the correct bevel and the fact that the lume is dead all point to an original dial that likely came with the watch from the factory. That only leaves the hands and it's hard to be sure from your picture. They should be flat and not slightly rounded over on the edges. also the sides of the arrow on the minute hand should be slightly rounded, not sharp. If that's what you see in person then you have probbaly got yourself a watch that is as original as they get. It is correct if the day and date wheel displays are not matching. The date wheel always looks duller and almost grey compared to the nice white day wheel.
|
|
|
Post by seikosthlm on Jan 9, 2016 19:21:16 GMT -8
Thank you. Good news! I love the insert. Any thoughts on the dial? The dial is original. All the fonts are correct; the date window has the correct bevel and the fact that the lume is dead all point to an original dial that likely came with the watch from the factory. That only leaves the hands and it's hard to be sure from your picture. They should be flat and not slightly rounded over on the edges. also the sides of the arrow on the minute hand should be slightly rounded, not sharp. If that's what you see in person then you have probbaly got yourself a watch that is as original as they get. It is correct if the day and date wheel displays are not matching. The date wheel always looks duller and almost grey compared to the nice white day wheel. Thanks for the input. Michael appreciated. Will definately do my homework on this model in the near future.
|
|