Just curious, why do you say that appears to be relumed?
The pristine, new looking packets are a giveaway too (aside from the font on them)
Seller was shifting these on and I bought one and subsequently cancelled....seller took 2 weeks to refund but probably something lost in translation...
Anyway glad I'm not into these so much as this is really quite a mess isn't it!
Thanks, Guy. I would guess the dial in your pic is relumed. The grey color seems suspicious. If it was naturally aged, I would think the greying petina would not be so perfectly even. But again, I'm a total novice when it comes to vintage watches, watchmaking, and restoration, so my opinion is little more than UNeducated guessing.I would say that's not the best way to tell in all honesty, for me. Quite often with Seiko lume you see a very appealing, textured, and sometimes uneven application.
The balance of tones between the hands and dial and the somewhat Seiko-esque matt look and texture I'd say that is original. Next would be to test lume brightness and longevity of glow. It should glow, albeit not for long and not very bright,.depending on age. That said I've had 7C43s from 1987 that barely glow, to 6309 HK dials that glow pretty bright and for a fair while longer. Both original and both around the same date of manufacture. Just different applications and thickness and products...possibly...
A relume that tends to mimic an aged watch will normally use pigments and paints which results in a less textured finish and either won't glow at all...or if using some lume as a base it will glow for longer, albeit slightly dimmer.
Ultimately it's bloody hard to know for sure!
For instance, relume or not relumed?
It looks good to me, too - bezel, chapter ring, bracelet all look to be kosher, the caseback stacks up and the dial is original. If it's relumed then it's been done pretty well and you have to assume it was done because the old lume was rotten.What do you think about this 6005?
It looks correct to my novice eye (although the dial appears to have been relumed), but I defer to the experts....
Off topic but that dial is mesmerising. Feel like you just want to dive in. Maybe I should start a business selling pools designed around classic Seiko chrono's!Correct, here in slightly different light.
And an original on Duncan's bench which I seem to remember trying to mimic instead of crisp white.
As for the 6139 in your post, well to me it looks good and likely original lume.... but I'm not too well versed in these. Hands and dial and caseback all seem to match with what I'd expect. Jon and Tom and Jim etc are your guys to chime in
I pray this post will not prove to be laden with bovine defecation. If so please excuse. Lord knows we have seen too much of that lately. Posting out of genuine curiosity as I purchased one exactly like it here on SCWF and it adorns my SpeedTimer -6031 now for what I consider an upgrade, but something has been bugging me since I got it. Now would the time to ask. So here goes:
I agree to it being a genuine -603X bezel above. Proper fonts and spacing, envelope and all that. FYI I purchased one just like that. Yet it has an interesting feature that I want to discuss - the "box under 60".
Pogue lore says this should supposedly be sign of a "newer Pepsi Pogue" bezel. Maybe introduced in 1974 or 1975 I seem to recall. Somebody chime in there.
I thought the last RESISTANT 6139-6032 using the coke bezel was produced generally 1973-ish but again I am no expert. Happy for a learned case back-tologist to jump in with proper facts.
So if -6032's production did indeed end before the accepted production dates when boxes started to appear under the 60 marker of pepsi style bezels, that would be interesting.
Ah, so much to learn ! So much to contemplate !