The Watch Site banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I now have a 6309 7049 to go with my 7040. Looking at the dials, there are some noticble differences. Looking at both independently, they'd each pass my authenticity tests, so the differences are... interesting.

The first is a 6309 7040 from Nov 1977. The second, a 7049 from Jan 1981.

449345

449346


Anyone have any thoughts or opinions?

Thanks in advance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,205 Posts
The printing on the second one seems a little thicker, less Seiko factory like. Anything printed in silver looks a bit "off"
Chapter ring is off too

Rob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
My thoughts too on the dial. Looks clumsier than the other one. If it is aftermarket it's nowhere near as obvious as most I've seen.

[Edit]

I can usually spot an aftermarket dial a mile off, but this one has me stumped. If I didn't have the other one to compare against, I doubt I'd be doubting it right now. The seller stated that this had been in storage for a long time (have no reason to doubt him but who knows). If so, could this be an old aftermarket dial unlike the modern ones we see in general circulation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I've found something interesting in one of Spencer Klein's videos. Appears that he's seen something similar on a 1980 6309:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
I think your '81 dial is legit, and I'm a little surprised it's being second guessed.

Here's my 6309-7049 from March '81 with original dial, hands, bezel, etc. Font looks similar to mine, and like your comparison, a bit chunkier than my '77 6306 7001 font - which is slightly crisper/thinner.

I've also noticed that the beveled date window is more prominent on the 6306/6309 70XX examples from the late '70's vs. '80's, that's just my own observation.

'81 6309


'77 6306
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I think your '81 dial is legit, and I'm a little surprised it's being second guessed.

Here's my 6309-7049 from March '81 with original dial, hands, bezel, etc. Font looks similar to mine, and like your comparison, a bit chunkier than my '77 6306 7001 font - which is slightly crisper/thinner.

I've also noticed that the beveled date window is more prominent on the 6306/6309 70XX examples from the late '70's vs. '80's, that's just my own observation.
Thanks, it's good to see some more examples. I think the issue is that the market's so full of fakes that we've become conditioned into being extremely suspicious of the slightest discrepancy. Every day's a school day when it comes to these watches.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,185 Posts
Thanks, it's good to see some more examples. I think the issue is that the market's so full of fakes that we've become conditioned into being extremely suspicious of the slightest discrepancy. Every day's a school day when it comes to these watches.
Very true, all the fakes have created a lot of suspicion with 6309, 6105, and 6139’s.

If I’m on our favorite auction site looking, I’m almost assuming they’re fake until I can prove otherwise
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Thanks for sharing. Not an expert here but for me the Japan 6309 704LT text at 6 o’clock is usually what my novice eyes look at first as I feel it’s more of a giveaway for aftermarket dials - I think its usually larger and the font looks narrower and taller. After that I would look at the Seiko / water resist text and date window bevel etc.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top