Watchlords

Originally posted here: http://forums.watchuseek.com/f11/bring-brain-xxiv-4716369.html

Lads and lasses, as always it is my pleasure to welcome all of you to the next instalment of Bring a Brain! As always, this comedy/watchdog series brings you some real gems for a good laugh. In today's instalment, some poor movement identification, fleecefests, and teabagged redials. Without further ado... The game's afoot! Follow your spirit, and upon this charge...

First up, this Datejust:
https://shop.hodinkee.com/collections/vintage-watches/products/1975-rolex-datejust-reference-1601-in-yellow-gold-with-black-onyx-dial?variant=12155322237003

There are fast learners, slow learners, and those who never learn. Three guesses which sort the H-Shop fellows are... No, it's not the cal.1570! It's the cal. 1575. "Why?", you ask for the nth time. Because, dear Shop team, who vet your stock so carefully that you better not seek a career in bomb disposal, the cal. 1570 does not have a date complication. It's a time-only movement.

Time for this Breitling:
https://shop.hodinkee.com/collections/vintage-watches/products/1960s-breitling-top-time-reference-810-24?variant=12155145388107

Regardless of the metal used for the main bloc, be it steel or brass, it's still gold plated. And no, it's not "light discolouration" around the pushers and crown - ahhh, the euphemisms... It's as if you'd pick up a rotting, fetid flounder, and call it produce of second freshness, just perfect to be served with chips.

Now, this Venus-but-not-calibre-170-powered Singer chrono:
https://shop.hodinkee.com/collections/vintage-watches/products/1940s-singer-chronograph-reference-760?variant=12155200307275

What's wrong with the movement identification performed on this one? I'll leave you to your deductions. Clue? Reggie stirs. More things don't check out, though.

This Royce happens to be a fleecefest and case material misidentification in one:
https://shop.hodinkee.com/collections/vintage-watches/products/1950s-royce-antimagnetic?variant=12155414478923

No! No, by Jove! No! It's not stainless steel! FOND acier inoxydable - you might really want to get a French-English dictionary, although all you need is to type "translate.google.com" into your browser's address bar... 1200 bucks for a chrome plated, not particularly desirable watch? Christ on a bike!




OK, now that we've dealt with the usual suspects, here's another dealer, who - while not under the BaB loupe for that long - has already earned a spot on Bring a Brain for their offerings. Lads and lasses, hail the King of Cape Cod!

First up for barrage, this Tissot:
https://vintagecaliber.com/collections/all/products/1941-tissot-cal-28-9-for-barth-zurich

Look at that font. Look at the perfunctory printing on the registers. Then, with yer hand on yer heart, do me a favour and tell me, that you do really believe your line about the "original and untouched champagne dial." Oh, this is like going to the movies, no? Well, maybe not. Maybe it's like going to a bazaar in Bodrum (or, for that matter, any other bazaar to the east of the Bosphorus), and hearing the stall owners yell, "Original fake Nikes, for you cheap, cheap, I give special price, just 200 euro!" Away with that teabagged redial!
Obviously, the case has been polished. I thought that the ratio of unpolished to polished pieces offered there is something like 1:20, now I'm thinking, like, 1:30?

Now, this UN chrono:
https://vintagecaliber.com/collections/all/products/1945-ulysse-nardin-jumbo-chronograph

Dunno how about you, lads and lasses, but I'd bet a pint that it's not the Valjoux 23, and is in fact its big brother, the Valjoux 22. OK, no need to buy me a pint, no bets needed. We all know it's the 22.

A Wittnauer:
https://vintagecaliber.com/collections/all/products/1958-wittnauer-guilloche-radium-dial
A nice pattern, likely oil-pressed, but not guilloche as such.


I hope you have all enjoyed this week's round-up, lads and lasses, and as always - Bring a Brain will return if necessary!

MKTheVintageBloke wrote:First up, this Datejust:
https://shop.hodinkee.com/collections/vintage-watches/products/1975-rolex-datejust-reference-1601-in-yellow-gold-with-black-onyx-dial?variant=12155322237003

There are fast learners, slow learners, and those who never learn. Three guesses which sort the H-Shop fellows are... No, it's not the cal.1570! It's the cal. 1575. "Why?", you ask for the nth time. Because, dear Shop team, who vet your stock so carefully that you better not seek a career in bomb disposal, the cal. 1570 does not have a date complication. It's a time-only movement.

Great, as usual, MK.

The thing that gets me about more than a few vintage Rolex collectors is that they constantly mess up either the model number or the movement number, or cross them up, or just plain get it totally wrong. Mention that a model 1601 can have a 1575 movement and they go into spastic convulsions.

TemerityB wrote:

MKTheVintageBloke wrote:First up, this Datejust:
https://shop.hodinkee.com/collections/vintage-watches/products/1975-rolex-datejust-reference-1601-in-yellow-gold-with-black-onyx-dial?variant=12155322237003

There are fast learners, slow learners, and those who never learn. Three guesses which sort the H-Shop fellows are... No, it's not the cal.1570! It's the cal. 1575. "Why?", you ask for the nth time. Because, dear Shop team, who vet your stock so carefully that you better not seek a career in bomb disposal, the cal. 1570 does not have a date complication. It's a time-only movement.

Great, as usual, MK.

The thing that gets me about more than a few vintage Rolex collectors is that they constantly mess up either the model number or the movement number, or cross them up, or just plain get it totally wrong. Mention that a model 1601 can have a 1575 movement and they go into spastic convulsions.

Thanks, TB!

Datejust 1601 can have a 1575 indeed. Got to look for the sort that goes into spastic convulsions over that, maybe on WUS. I will most certainly enjoy the show if I do. Would take venturing into the Rolex forum there, and it's a silly place (by no means in terms of the watches - in terms of the people there).

Rolex themselves are to blame for a big part of the mess, really. You see, the Donkeys only read the calibre number stamped on the bridge - and in case of Rolex, the problem is, that no-date 15X0 movements often were equipped with bridges marked with the 15X5 signature for the date version, and vice versa. So, a no-date 1570 can be stamped 1575, and a date 1575 can be marked as a 1570. Still, this doesn't change the fact, that the no-date is the 15X0, and the date version will always be a 15X5.
But the Donkeys being Donkeys will never get that.
I've seen a few episodes of their now dead and buried Friday Live show (got to know what the enemy's up to), and I've been consistently amazed with all the horological literature on their bookshelf in the background. However, what had me amazed even more, is how can one have that many horological books, and never fucking bother to as much as look into one of them - because over and over they prove, that they have never bothered.