King Seiko 49999 and 4420-9990 Chronometer.

[Rod]

Ok here's why I spend months (years) researching a particular watch before I buy.

I just hope someone realises before buying this one! I'm not doing this to be smug, I'm just amazed at how little research people do and then pay $$$$ for incorrect watches. We've all seen this with the more common watches, how many rat trap 6309's have we seen, so trying to do my bit to stop the rot and save some $$.

 The Watch Ninja

Theses are not your average Seiko's, being the first KS Chronometer and at almost the same price as the GS Chronometer these were a very expensive watch in their day. They came with a certificate of compliance to the Chronometer standard, were hand assembled and tested and were the only KS to wear the Gold Chronometer Lion, etc.

OK which is the rat trap that's going to bite and why. 

Watch A. Currently $1300







Watch B. Currently $1100

[Adrian-VTA]

Well,

For starters, no.1 has a stuffed dial, which immediately counts it out for me. It also appears to have some bodge paint work done on it. Movement looks OK and does have the hack finger. So red flag for me just for the dial.

No.2 has the wrong bezel fitted and has no movement shots. It also has that bizarre dodge photography style. So another red flag. Also the reflection from the photographer is too pink, I don't think he's wearing pants.

[Thomas]

Hi Rod,

First of all, thank you taking the time to share your knowledge (assuming you will eventually tell us what the right and wrong are ). I am very new at the vintage Seiko game and while I an trying to be careful and learn before I buy, it can really help to have some who knows better point out the differences.

So, here are my thought (really not much more than guesses really).

The real one is shown in the first set of pictures and the fake is the lower one. Why? (Here come the guesses!)

The font of Chronometer is wrong on the lower watch.
The "W on the crown of the lower one is too "high" on the crown.
There should not be that "Special Dial" mark under the "Diashock 27 Jewels" text, like there is on the lower watch.

Also in the upper pictures they show the movement, which would be much harder to fake.

I'm sure there are plenty more clues that I have missed, like details about the shape of the case or lugs, the length of the seconds markers, or the dial text at the bottom of the dial. Heck for all I know, I have it all completely backwards!! 


Now, off topic, I really like those "Medal-lions"!!

- Thomas

[daveryan56]

I think the first one is legit...the lugs and crown on the second one look off...but I'm so new at this I could be way off base. I am excited to know what the answer is though!

[scubarob99]

Crown on the second and font on the second is off...

Rob

[HiBeat]

Oct 19, 2014 4:41:03 GMT -8 Adrian-VTA said:

Also the reflection from the photographer is too pink, I don't think he's wearing pants.

Well that'll rule that one out for me......cleaning out DNA takes on new meaning

[ninja01]

OK, well there is a lot to process.

Just some general comments about these.

1. According to martback: " the Liner Chrono and the 4420 KS Chrono ... have had both the script and the normal text, in both cases with the script text in the earlier models. "

Indeed, there are ones marked with the old style model# (49999) and with the "new style" 8 digit hyphenated reflecting the cal# in the 1st 4 digits (4420-9990).


So, the script/cursive "Chronometer" dial was on the 49999 and the printed "Chronometer" was on the 4420-9990. Following is an example from martback of the printed type:


2. I have catalog shots of each one, though I don't have them both in a server to show. Here is one that appears online:

4420 is in lower right.


3. Here is a closer shot of the movement from a 4420-9990 example:


4. Regarding the statement, "There should not be that "Special Dial" mark under the "Diashock 27 Jewels" text, like there is on the lower watch."

First, what is shown is NOT a "Special dial" logo but an "Applied dial" logo. Those indeed did appear on certain models of these 4420A's.
Likely, the "AD" logo appeared legitimately on the earlier 49999 model with script Chronometer on dial, while no logo appeared on dials of 4420-9990's (the later model) which had the printed Chronometer. Again I have a catalog scan of a page showing the cal 430 GS and the earlier 4420A side-by-side. That 4420 (49999) has both the script/cursive Chronometer and the "AD" logo.

Unfortunately, some photos in a good post about these on another forum have been moved & don't show any longer. I do have those shots personally backed up in my "database" but I don't have them in a server.

5. In all cases, I do NOT have "trusted reference shots" of the crown detail (side shots for example).

That's all I'll say for now due to lack of time lately.

[bobbymike]

That second watch appears to have a laser engraved caseback (you see the same thing on some military watch fakes).

[Rod]

Well that's enough fun! Both of these watches have faults.

The first one is a total hatchet job.

1, The KS Chronometer from 1963/4 are coded 49999, the case back for this one is coded 44999 making it a case back from the standard 44 KS.
2, The case backs gold emblem as been taken from a 49999 and fitted to this case back
3, the case is from a 44999 not a 49999 (the lower watch has the correct case)
4, the year is 4xxxxx being 1964 BUT movement and dial are from the second evolution of the KS chronometer which changed in mid 1965 and lasted till 1967.
5, if this was a genuine 1965/7 KS chronometer then the case back code would be 4420-9990

 So what we have here is a movement and dial swap into another case with the added bonus of the gold lion and not worth $1300.00 at all.

The second watch is somewhat better although not as it seems.

1, The case back is from 1963 and NOS but is new and not from this watch. Notice in the photo of the crown and lug, the dimpling and wear on the lug to the left, a clear sign of a well worn watch, NOT a near NOS watch.
2, the sweep hand is the later (1965/7) arrow hand (i believe one of the most beautiful sweep hand ever on a Seiko ) 
3, the movement, (the photo i didn't include)… has a bridge from the standard KS44 the Chronometers all have 4420a stamped on them. The standard KS44 is unstamped.



4, the crowns incorrect 

So what we have is, a 1963/5 case/dial/movement with a new case back fitted, replaced bridge and sweep hand. Not worth the $1610.00 paid.

The dials are totally correct but from different evolutions of the KS Chronometer.

P.S the lower case back is correct and acid etched giving the "laser etch look"

[Rod]

So what should they look like and what to look out for in these +$1000 watches! 

Well from 1963 till somewhere in early 1965 they were coded 49999 and etched, making a genuine watch without a worn case back hard to find.



The movement should look like this, and as can be seen the bridge is stamped 4420A and the movement number is stamped on the movement and should match all documentation supplied with the watch.



Note, the hacking lever, boomerang looking lever on the top, is removed to release the crown stem. The screw used to act as the pivot often gets "threaded" so dodgy dealers remove the lever and screw! hoping that the crown gasket will hold the crown in until you've paid

Dial is the scripted "chronometer" and has the diashock emblem bellow the "King Seiko Diashock 27 Jewels)





Now the second evolution, Seiko still hadn't learn't it's lesson with etching so the case backs are all etched. Coded 4420-9990 and still with the Gold Lion medallion.



And the movements had extra info added, but still the 4420A on the bridge.



The dial has the upper case "chronometer" but no diashock symbol.



All the crowns are the same.


 
Catalog shot from 1964 ish..



1965 ish





This is my Dec 1964 49999 with all the accoutrements.

 

[Deleted]

Thanks Rod; if after all this, I should be naive enough to buy one of the cobbled pieces, I have no one to blame but the seller

Great info and thanks for sharing your years of research and knowledge with us 7dfe79adc2f0

[Rod]

Oct 19, 2014 19:18:41 GMT -8 @penguinbce said:

Thanks Rod; if after all this, I should be naive enough to buy one of the cobbled pieces, I have no one to blame but the seller

Great info and thanks for sharing your years of research and knowledge with us 7dfe79adc2f0

[Groundhog66]

The amount of knowledge some of you folks have, just makes my head want to explode...Well done, Rod!

[ninja01]

Oct 20, 2014 15:25:35 GMT -8 Groundhog66 said:

The amount of knowledge some of you folks have, just makes my head want to explode...Well done, Rod!

Well, as he said in the OP,

"Ok here's why I spend months (years) researching a particular watch before I buy."

That will tend to make one an "expert" in something ... Getting the original catalog scans & being able inspect vintage NOS pieces in, and even buy from "the homeland" is a big help as well!! Visiting the Seiko Institute in person can be a big help as well (I knew several folks over the years who fit both of those categories!!)