Opinions on this 1675 Dial..

[PVR]

Genuine or refinished? MK5 or service or neither?

[Sky21]

The back has the Lemrich dial marking of a Mk 5A, but the font looks more like the Beyeler Mk 5 version, except for the coronet. The bottom of the coronet doesn't really look like either one to me, but like the Mk 5B. However the Mk 5B dial has round Os and this one has the oval Os of the 5 and 5A. Plus the alignment of the font is from the 5A. I guess what I'm saying is maybe a refinished dial, but that's just my opinion, I would wait for confirmation from some of the GMT heavyweights. It is not a service dial.

[springer]

Below is photo of a known Mark 5A. The second photo is a blow-up of the dial being discussed. The backs are both marked the same for a 5A dial. Compare the second E and A in found in PERPETUAL from both photos. They are identical as well as other letters/fonts. The coronet is slightly different
in the opening or "mouth" at the bottom of each coronet but the possibility exists that it could be the result of a printing flaw.

In regard to the original question poised here, the dial appears genuine but it would be nice to see it in person for a much better comparative analysis.

[Tom1675]

Originally Posted by springer

Below is photo of a known Mark 5A. The second photo is a blow-up of the dial being discussed. The backs are both marked the same for a 5A dial. Compare the second E and A in found in PERPETUAL from both photos. They are identical as well as other letters/fonts. The coronet is slightly different
in the opening or "mouth" at the bottom of each coronet but the possibility exists that it could be the result of a printing flaw.

In regard to the original question poised here, the dial appears genuine but it would be nice to see it in person for a much better comparative analysis.

Great! To state the obvious, I see the letters on each example are 'pressed' in the same font with identical spacing but are clearly bolder in the OP's example. (Newbie) Lesson learned is how much thicker these fonts can be but still be the same mark...

Might be a lame parallel but its kind of like a lithograph printing where the earlier prints (say 5/500) are more desirable as there is very little bleeding with colors but later in the the printing (400/500) the colors can bleed and are a little more sloppy. Or maybe the person pressing the dial just used more paint...

[springer]

Originally Posted by Tom1675

Great! To state the obvious, I see the letters on each example are 'pressed' in the same font with identical spacing but are clearly bolder in the OP's example. (Newbie) Lesson learned is how much thicker these fonts can be but still be the same mark...

Might be a lame parallel but its kind of like a lithograph printing where the earlier prints (say 5/500) are more desirable as there is very little bleeding with colors but later in the the printing (400/500) the colors can bleed and are a little more sloppy. Or maybe the person pressing the dial just used more paint...

Good observation. A camera can also cause a distorted image if moved ever so slightly at slow shutter speeds making something appear thicker or wider than it really is. While the crown is slightly different at the mouth, I wouldn't rule out excessive inking. Finding 100% knock-off dials just doesn't happen - or rarely in my experience.

[uncleluck]

Might be the overall tilt of the dial but it looks like the printing is wonky in relation to the lume to me.