The Watch Site banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In an earlier thread, Technoman talked about earliest productions of the 6139 Chrono. Is there a production date chart?


Looking through my parts box, I found a 6139-6002 back, dated February '69 I believe. Early type, "Resist" marked. When did the -60xx production start? Do I have my dating wrong on this back?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
I would like to see that caseback. It would be unusual to see anything from early 1969 marked "Resist". As I said, the earliest one I think anybody has seen is dated February, 1969, and is marked "Waterproof". The "Waterproof" marking is a clear indicator that the watch is from '69, not '79. Not sure about one marked "Resist"... ---A
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Your wish is my command. Crappy photo, but the SN is 928110, Japan J


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
I have seen these dated as late as October 1978 as 6005's but I dont recall seeing any 6002 that late, could this possibly be one of the very latest ones from early 1979, did they produce the 6002 that long? Is it all original and if so is it marked resist on the dial?


I have what I think may be an odd one as well but I am not certain. I have a 6106-8239 where the serial starts 94, and I didn't think they produced those as late as 1979 either, but it too is also marked resist both on the dial and caseback....


Weird....

Spencer said:
Your wish is my command. Crappy photo, but the SN is 928110, Japan J


 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I thought that in the mid-70s they switched over to the "straight" type text on the back - I thought that what I think of the "horseshoe" ended then. And "Resist" dials ended by the early 70s, as far as I've read. Not sure about the backs. My new 6139-6010 is a Proof/Proof and it has a back just like this, and it's a '69, guaranteed.


This back came off of a gutted parts watch out of England which I suspect was also mix-and-matched prior to said gutting. I don't have any more history on it than what you see here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
223 Posts
I've got a 6139 from 1978 with the horseshoe markings, so they were using this case back style through at least then (pretty sure it isn't from 1968 :eek: ). I wonder if they were using up case parts as production wound down in the late '70s. With the resist markings it would make more sense that your case back is from one of the last 6139s produced rather than one of the first.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
isupsyclone said:
I've got a 6139 from 1978 with the horseshoe markings, so they were using this case back style through at least then (pretty sure it isn't from 1968 :eek: ). I wonder if they were using up case parts as production wound down in the late '70s. With the resist markings it would make more sense that your case back is from one of the last 6139s produced rather than one of the first.

Damn, and here I was starting to think I had something amazing. I mean, more amazing than a Seiko chrono, that is. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Spencer said:
Damn, and here I was starting to think I had something amazing. I mean, more amazing than a Seiko chrono, that is. :D
Maybe you do have something amazing. I have this 6139-6009 that I assumed was from July, 1969. The watch has a 6139A movement...which says '69. It has a notched case...which says '69. It is marked Resist on the dial and caseback...which says it may be a later watch. And it has the one-piece seconds hand...also a later feature. I got this from the original owner on Ebay. I think it is from '69, but it is hard to say. There are mixed clues with this watch.

Your caseback is a really tough one to nail down. I have seen some really early JDM 6139s with SNs that date them to Feb-Mar-Apr 1969, but I have never seen an export model with a number that would date it to early 1969. Hmmmm... ---A
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
WOW! I just noticed something really interesting! :-\

Note how my watch says "WATER RESIST", and yours says "WATER RESISTANT". I looked through all of my 6139-600xs, and found one other one that said "Water Resist". It dates to March, 1970, and is also a 6139-6009. ALL of my other examples, from 1971-1978, say "WATER RESISTANT"...whether they have the straight writing or horseshoe writing. And I have quite a few of these. :eek:

This 1970 watch also has a notched case, 6139A movement, RESIST dial, RESIST caseback, and one-piece second hand. I believe if a 6139 is marked "WATER RESIST" it is an early model, if they say "WATER RESISTANT", it is a later model. I suspect your watch is one of the last of it's kind...

It is my opinion that when Seiko first stopped marking casebacks "WATERPROOF" in 1969-1970, they started marking them "WATER RESIST". But they then quickly abandoned this as well and started marking watches "WATER RESISTANT" instead.

What do you guys think? Are there any other watches that we know date to 1969-1970 that are marked "WATER RESIST"? ---A
 

·
Craftsman
Joined
·
3,920 Posts
I also have a 6139-6009 from march of 1970 that is marked resist on dial and case back. I believe it is the change over month from proof to resist because I also have one from Feb 1970 which is proof-proof. Both have the notched cases.

I believe the case back in question is from 79' rather then 69'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
I missed that it said resistant, I agree that this would definitely make it a 1979 model in which case, it is the latest 6139-6002 caseback I have seen.


There are also apparently some transitional watches that are marked resist on the dial and proof on the caseback but not sure about vice versa. There was a 6139-6001 for sale on the sales forum from August 1970 that was like this which is very very late for a proof caseback on these.


So not wanting to hijack a thread, but can we assume then from this information that this resist marked 6106-8239 is from April 1969? If so that seems really early for a resist marked watch.





 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
SeikoPsycho2 said:
I also have a 6139-6009 from march of 1970 that is marked resist on dial and case back. I believe it is the change over month from proof to resist because I also have one from Feb 1970 which is proof-proof. Both have the notched cases.

I believe the case back in question is from 79' rather then 69'
Yep, definitely 1979 on Spencer's caseback. But the watch pictured in my earlier post is from July, 1969 and is marked Resist/Resist, just the same as the one I have from March, 1970. I don't think that there was a particular day or month when the switch from Proof to Resist was made...I think it depended on the model and the destination country. It seems that US market watches (those with case numbers ending in 9) were switched over before others were. ---A
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Technoman said:
I missed that it said resistant, I agree that this would definitely make it a 1979 model in which case, it is the latest 6139-6002 caseback I have seen.


There are also apparently some transitional watches that are marked resist on the dial and proof on the caseback but not sure about vice versa. There was a 6139-6001 for sale on the sales forum from August 1970 that was like this which is very very late for a proof caseback on these.


So not wanting to hijack a thread, but can we assume then from this information that this resist marked 6106-8239 is from April 1969? If so that seems really early for a resist marked watch.






[/quote]

Yep, 1969. You might even find a 6106B under the caseback instead of the ubiquitous 6106C. I think the "RESIST" instead of "RESISTANT" on the caseback is a dead give-away. Besides, I do not think they were marking anything "RESIST" on the dial in 1979...if that model was still in production it likely would have had a plain dial.

As I said, the North American market watches seem to have made the switch to RESIST sooner. Your watch is an North American market model. Strangely enough, I have that EXACT same model on it's original bracelet. Mine is marked the exact same way, and dates to June, 1969. ---A
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
I also just noticed in looking at a review of a 1970 6106-8239 posted here at SCWF that the caseback on these changed sometime during late 1969 early 1970. The newer ones have the smoother caseback without the hard step that the one I posted here has. I also have a couple of 6106-8100's where one has the older and one the newer casebacks too.

Cobrajet25 said:
Yep, 1969. You might even find a 6106B under the caseback instead of the ubiquitous 6106C. I think the "RESIST" instead of "RESISTANT" on the caseback is a dead give-away. Besides, I do not think they were marking anything "RESIST" on the dial in 1979...if that model was still in production it likely would have had a plain dial.

As I said, the North American market watches seem to have made the switch to RESIST sooner. Your watch is an North American market model. Strangely enough, I have that EXACT same model on it's original bracelet. Mine is marked the exact same way, and dates to June, 1969. ---A
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Technoman said:
I also just noticed in looking at a review of a 1970 6106-8239 posted here at SCWF that the caseback on these changed sometime during late 1969 early 1970. The newer ones have the smoother caseback without the hard step that the one I posted here has. I also have a couple of 6106-8100's where one has the older and one the newer casebacks too.
Lol...I call those casebacks with the steps "blisterbacks". ;) ---A
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
this is a great thread; thanks for all of the input!

so, when did 6139 production formally STOP? I'll need to do the unthinkable and put together all of the different elements of the original gutted parts watch that this back came with. It had a gold dial and gold bezel ring, both in OK condition. Face was marked Seiko Chronograph. Movement was stripped of the winding bridge, balance, most surface screws and one of the springs. Came on an original H-link band, the later tapered one. Crystal was good, and the watch came with a complete stem with spring and bezel gear.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Hmm, I just came up with another mystery:


Picked this up for VERY cheap on El Bayo.


6139-8002. It was so inexpensive that I'm surprised I won it. I literally just noticed that it's a "Resist / Resistant" - Resist dial, Resistant back. By the serial number it's a '72??? I thought "Resist" dials stopped before then.





 

·
Registered
Joined
·
964 Posts
If you ask me: legit transition model. Odds are against that someone just married a resist-dial with an resist-back!
And again: look at, what the photo data base shows us?!?
We have to adjust it as unexperienced users might take it as "the" reference!

Cheers,

Axel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Spencer said:
Hmm, I just came up with another mystery:


Picked this up for VERY cheap on El Bayo.


6139-8002. It was so inexpensive that I'm surprised I won it. I literally just noticed that it's a "Resist / Resistant" - Resist dial, Resistant back. By the serial number it's a '72??? I thought "Resist" dials stopped before then.





[img]
[/quote]

Your is definitely '72. So is this one I just got...not quite "cheap", but it looks really really nice. This is also a Resist dial/Resistant caseback. I don't think there was a dial that says "Resistant", and I don't think that there was a particular day or month that Seiko stopped putting water resistance indications on the dials. It seems to be something that was "phased out". I have seen other watches from early to mid '72 that are marked "Water70mResist", so I think it just depends on the stocks of particular dials for particular models Seiko had.

Perhaps models that sold in smaller numbers used "Resist" dials longer...until supplies of them were used up? ---A
 

Attachments

1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top