|
Post by dapellegrini on Oct 4, 2023 18:06:46 GMT -8
|
|
mnementh
WS Benefactor
I like this: https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/
Posts: 384
|
Post by mnementh on Oct 5, 2023 5:36:18 GMT -8
*is suddenly very, very afraid...*
mnem enablers... each and every one of ye.
|
|
|
Post by dapellegrini on Oct 31, 2023 15:33:41 GMT -8
Well my theory about which early black dials settled more reddish vs yellowish on the bottom half of the 24 hour ring... just went up in smoke. These two seem to have identical origins, and still the difference. I am not convinced that this is just UV / sun exposure, but I guess maybe? The redder dial is in better condition.
|
|
HiBeat
Global Moderator
SEIKO Iko Iko GDTRWS
Posts: 8,675
|
Post by HiBeat on Oct 31, 2023 15:49:46 GMT -8
Possibly humidity exposure plays a role in color change.
|
|
|
Post by dapellegrini on Apr 16, 2024 17:32:27 GMT -8
As I am discovering radium lume in more and more vintage Seikos, through 1968, I suspect that the 6117-6019, while seemingly identical to the 6117-6010, likely had radium lume - certainly from the brownish color of the ones I have seen listed online. To be confirmed. Thus the model designation difference -6010 vs -6019.
Then we have the 6117-6409, which started life as a RESIST case back, then changed to RESISTANT around October 1970. The 6117-6400 was PROOF until October 1970. From there, I suspect the -6400 and -6409 were identical, through the end of the normal -6409 in Dec 1971 or Jan of 1972. Maybe just running through the rest of the -6409 case backs? Then we got the SGP -6409. After that the -6400 and -6409 merged into just -6400's.
Moral of the story, I think there were likely tangible reasons why we see -0 vs -9 models that otherwise look identical... In this case either lume material or RESIST[ANT] vs PROOF
|
|
saldog
WS Benefactor
Aspiring to be a savant, but for now just a watch idiot
Posts: 1,106
|
Post by saldog on Apr 16, 2024 17:52:36 GMT -8
The 6105-8110 is known for having lume that patinas to a tan color and it is said that shows it came from Daini vs Suwa. I haven’t heard if it was radium though. Did the 6019s come from a different factory than the 6010s?
|
|
|
Post by dapellegrini on Apr 16, 2024 18:00:21 GMT -8
I know some 6105's are radium lumed. The 6117-6010 and 6019 are all marked Japan J.... perhaps the same factory?
EDIT: perhaps this feeds into my other question about the earliest model(s) ending in -9.... it may be that some of the 6105's predated this model number differentiator... Perhaps like the 62MAS with the radium dials?
|
|
GuyJ
Needs a Life!
Whitley Bay, UK
Posts: 2,862
|
Post by GuyJ on Apr 17, 2024 8:16:34 GMT -8
There does exist a daini radium 6105-8000. As I am discovering radium lume in more and more vintage Seikos, through 1968, I suspect that the 6117-6019, while seemingly identical to the 6117-6010, likely had radium lume - certainly from the brownish color of the ones I have seen listed online. To be confirmed. Thus the model designation difference -6010 vs -6019. Then we have the 6117-6409, which started life as a RESIST case back, then changed to RESISTANT around October 1970. The 6117-6400 was PROOF until October 1970. From there, I suspect the -6400 and -6409 were identical, through the end of the normal -6409 in Dec 1971 or Jan of 1972. Maybe just running through the rest of the -6409 case backs? Then we got the SGP -6409. After that the -6400 and -6409 merged into just -6400's. Moral of the story, I think there were likely tangible reasons why we see -0 vs -9 models that otherwise look identical... In this case either lume material or RESIST[ANT] vs PROOF
|
|