The Watch Site banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
ebay.com/itm/401904131355?ul_noapp=true

I dont trust my limited research on this, to feel warm and fuzzy about pulling the trigger, wonder if any experts would help me with my search for a 6139

quick think i noticed was 2nd digit was an N, where i thought it was supposed to be a number of the month not letter for these particular watches in time.

it has since ended but would like to learn the good and the bad with this example to help learn what to look for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
941 Posts
ebay.com/itm/401904131355?ul_noapp=true

I dont trust my limited research on this, to feel warm and fuzzy about pulling the trigger, wonder if any experts would help me with my search for a 6139

quick think i noticed was 2nd digit was an N, where i thought it was supposed to be a number of the month not letter for these particular watches in time.

it has since ended but would like to learn the good and the bad with this example to help learn what to look for.
The only thing I notice that could be AM is the crown, maybe it's the lighting but its not suppose to be flat. Not really the best example to aquire. Personally, I'd be put off by the corrosion. I see mild pitting on the rotor and some corrosion on parts of the movement. Seems fair for the price it fetched.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
523 Posts
The dial looks a little sketchy. Take a close look at the “Seiko” logo in the third picture. The mounting holes for the logo are clearly visible, which seems dubious. Also, the bezel insert has a block at the 60 position, which is incorrect for a watch of this vintage (November 1972). This watch looks like a collection of mismatched parts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
941 Posts
The dial looks a little sketchy. Take a close look at the “Seiko” logo in the third picture. The mounting holes for the logo are clearly visible, which seems dubious. Also, the bezel insert has a block at the 60 position, which is incorrect for a watch of this vintage (November 1972). This watch looks like a collection of mismatched parts.
Good catch about that block.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
Also, the bezel insert has a block at the 60 position, which is incorrect for a watch of this vintage (November 1972). This watch looks like a collection of mismatched parts.
I noticed that too. I think the only bezel inserts that have the block at the 60 positition are the later models around 77 or so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
ebay.com/itm/401904131355?ul_noapp=true

I dont trust my limited research on this, to feel warm and fuzzy about pulling the trigger, wonder if any experts would help me with my search for a 6139

quick think i noticed was 2nd digit was an N, where i thought it was supposed to be a number of the month not letter for these particular watches in time.
Second character is a letter for october (O), november (N) and december (D).
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top