Post by huangcjz on Jun 25, 2020 2:44:56 GMT -8
Here are some watches which I have with what I suspect are re-dials, which were difficult for me to distinguish, and which fooled me, hence me buying them:
Type 10:
I'm not sure about this one - it looks like it might be original, but I'm also doubting because it looks like it might be too good to be true, with the "SEIKO" printing perhaps too bold and thick?
Seiko Unique:
I have never seen a Seiko Unique with this type-face used on the dial (which is why I got it, but now I think it is a re-dial). Nor have I seen a Seiko marked with "DIASHOCK" on the upper half of the dial, nor have I seen one marked with "antimagnetic" on the dial. It also lacks "JAPAN" under the 6 o'clock marker on the dial, and the minute markings on either side of the 6 o'clock marker are un-evenly spaced:
I have seen one other example with the same type of dial, but that watch has a red, plastic-looking seconds hand, so I suspect that that is also a re-dial.
Two other, original, Seiko Uniques, for comparison:
Later version:
Earlier version:
Seiko Sportsmatic:
For this one, I believe that the main dial text is too bold, too closely-spaced, and slightly uneven in height, compared to other Sportmatics. This is perhaps easiest to see in the down-strokes of the "m", which are too bold and too close to each other, with not enough space between them. I believe that the main dial text may have been re-done, whereas the dial code has not - note how much thinner the dial code text is, and how dirty the outer ring where the original dial text is, in contrast to how clean the main dial surface is, where the potentially re-done printing of the main dial text has been done:
Three other, completely original, examples of Sportsmatics, for comparison:
Seiko Weekdater:
For this one, the letters in the main dial text are stretched too much horizontally, most noticeably in the "D" of "WEEKDATER", and the spacing is wrong - there is no space in between the "3)" and the following "J", and the "EWELS" text following that is larger than the rest of the text, and also too close to the "J". The numbers in the "1000" part of the dial code are too closely spaced with each other - there is not enough space in between the digits. The digits are also too vertical, and not spaced/stretched horizontally enough. The brushed finish on the dial is also not straight, which I have never seen before on a watch from the late 1960s. The cross-hair on the dial is also not quite straight, and is too thick, and reaches too close to the 12, 9, and 6 o'clock markers - there should be a slight space in between. Also, the markers which are opposite each other are not aligned with each other, most noticeably between the 2 o'clock and the 8 o'clock markers:
Here are examples of what it should look like: images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59235d7059cc686f49e4b5a9/1560360589505-KVE21CZTCJOU82PTLOBI/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kLkXF2pIyv_F2eUT9F60jBl7gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z4YTzHvnKhyp6Da-NYroOW3ZGjoBKy3azqku80C789l0iyqMbMesKd95J-X4EagrgU9L3Sa3U8cogeb0tjXbfawd0urKshkc5MgdBeJmALQKw/IMG_8539.JPG?format=1500w
images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/58e26bf0414fb5c0b2c2474d/1561498607228-GT79CBPA9YAPSMCW4D1E/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kD58n-XyZIr7rpIytv3Joi17gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmTl_ALRZE0UkEheIF40jl8jcK0Je9MDM9ZwjDx4d64fIiMFYlLw0qXPXYNBPt0JB_/4EA8AC60-6437-4F6F-9E5C-49C45B0DFFAE.jpeg?format=1500w
It scares me how difficult it can be to spot re-dials now.
Type 10:
I'm not sure about this one - it looks like it might be original, but I'm also doubting because it looks like it might be too good to be true, with the "SEIKO" printing perhaps too bold and thick?
Seiko Unique:
I have never seen a Seiko Unique with this type-face used on the dial (which is why I got it, but now I think it is a re-dial). Nor have I seen a Seiko marked with "DIASHOCK" on the upper half of the dial, nor have I seen one marked with "antimagnetic" on the dial. It also lacks "JAPAN" under the 6 o'clock marker on the dial, and the minute markings on either side of the 6 o'clock marker are un-evenly spaced:
I have seen one other example with the same type of dial, but that watch has a red, plastic-looking seconds hand, so I suspect that that is also a re-dial.
Two other, original, Seiko Uniques, for comparison:
Later version:
Earlier version:
Seiko Sportsmatic:
For this one, I believe that the main dial text is too bold, too closely-spaced, and slightly uneven in height, compared to other Sportmatics. This is perhaps easiest to see in the down-strokes of the "m", which are too bold and too close to each other, with not enough space between them. I believe that the main dial text may have been re-done, whereas the dial code has not - note how much thinner the dial code text is, and how dirty the outer ring where the original dial text is, in contrast to how clean the main dial surface is, where the potentially re-done printing of the main dial text has been done:
Three other, completely original, examples of Sportsmatics, for comparison:
Seiko Weekdater:
For this one, the letters in the main dial text are stretched too much horizontally, most noticeably in the "D" of "WEEKDATER", and the spacing is wrong - there is no space in between the "3)" and the following "J", and the "EWELS" text following that is larger than the rest of the text, and also too close to the "J". The numbers in the "1000" part of the dial code are too closely spaced with each other - there is not enough space in between the digits. The digits are also too vertical, and not spaced/stretched horizontally enough. The brushed finish on the dial is also not straight, which I have never seen before on a watch from the late 1960s. The cross-hair on the dial is also not quite straight, and is too thick, and reaches too close to the 12, 9, and 6 o'clock markers - there should be a slight space in between. Also, the markers which are opposite each other are not aligned with each other, most noticeably between the 2 o'clock and the 8 o'clock markers:
Here are examples of what it should look like: images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59235d7059cc686f49e4b5a9/1560360589505-KVE21CZTCJOU82PTLOBI/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kLkXF2pIyv_F2eUT9F60jBl7gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z4YTzHvnKhyp6Da-NYroOW3ZGjoBKy3azqku80C789l0iyqMbMesKd95J-X4EagrgU9L3Sa3U8cogeb0tjXbfawd0urKshkc5MgdBeJmALQKw/IMG_8539.JPG?format=1500w
images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/58e26bf0414fb5c0b2c2474d/1561498607228-GT79CBPA9YAPSMCW4D1E/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kD58n-XyZIr7rpIytv3Joi17gQa3H78H3Y0txjaiv_0fDoOvxcdMmMKkDsyUqMSsMWxHk725yiiHCCLfrh8O1z5QHyNOqBUUEtDDsRWrJLTmTl_ALRZE0UkEheIF40jl8jcK0Je9MDM9ZwjDx4d64fIiMFYlLw0qXPXYNBPt0JB_/4EA8AC60-6437-4F6F-9E5C-49C45B0DFFAE.jpeg?format=1500w
It scares me how difficult it can be to spot re-dials now.