Aged Hands Advice

[rob2681]

Hi,
I'm very new to vintage collecting and was hoping for help with a question regarding a 1969 Mark IV Red Sub. As shown in the picture the hands are aged quite differently than the dial. Is this something that significantly deflates the value or maybe something that is desired? I tried to search for examples of this, but was not successful.

Thanks in advance for your response.

[Gina Marie]

Hands and dials often age at different rates. Currently, uniformity is preferred but can be too good to be true often if the dial and hands are a perfect match. I look at the hands as a better barometer of the life the watch had. If i see moisture evidence in the hands and not the dial then likely a little moisture got in so i better take a deep dive on the movememt. That being written....a few shades difference is ok. A patina'd dial with white hands is no bueno. Glowing hands are no bueno. Often you can see more age near the base of an hour or minute hand than near the tip....that i like.

[rob2681]

Thank you for the advice. I am thinking of acquiring this one as my first vintage watch. I really feel good about the seller, also the watch has been to the factory in Geneva for service and certification. From what I read Red Subs are a good entry point for collectors.

[J!m]

Well, I notice the dial has been touchd up and some lume plots are chipped away.

Hopefully, this is reflected in the price being asked for this watch.

Dial and case are he most important parts of a watch.

[speedolex]

Whether or not it is the right thing to do, I could never get enjoyment out of the watch whose hands and dial markers are different colors. It would distract me and drive me crazy with frustration every time I looked at it.

Aging and a nice patina is fine, but in my opinion the hands and the lume dots must match.

[Gina Marie]

Rob, i sort of agree. The hands are an issue but the dial is really the killer here. Also the top right lug is pretty thin.....they say that the condition of your first vintage is not important but that of your second is very important. If you buy this watch you will upgrade and sell this within the year at a loss. I would toss a few more pesos out there an do it right once. As my grandmother once said, "the most expensive is always the cheapest."

[acf321]

Here ye Gina Marie.

regarding this watch, I love it, but to Speedo's point and yours, there are some obvious issues. My first vintage was a 5500 explorer, that was in mint condition with papers. When it arrived (from the UK), I took it to; 1) my local RSC and they could not authenticate it, 2) my local Swiss watch expert who could not authenticate it, and 3) my Rolex collector buddy who said; "that is a lovely watch and it looks great on your wrist, but I would never buy it". I asked him why and he said; "the face has been repainted and that is an absolute no-no".

That watch is now back with it's former owner and I have just bought a mint 1980 1016 with papers. To Gina's point, spend the extra (mine was ~3X extras actually) and you know that every time you wear it that it is a very desirable and ultimately valuable item.

Just my two cents worth. Good luck.

[rob2681]

Thank you for the advice. I think I will look a bit further. Each of the points are salient and make good sense to me.

[rob2681]

mistakenly copied post

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by rob2681

Thank you for the advice. I think I will look a bit further. Each of the points are salient and make good sense to me.

Here's a poem to make it easier to remember:

When considering a vintage watch
The hands and dial markers must match
Or you will be miserable