Tudor snowflake marker size, second hand size markerDecember 17 2009 at 7:20 AM
|Ed (no login)|
from IP address 188.8.131.52
I have noticed that some snowflakes date and no date have different marker sizes...is there a MAXI and non maxi snowflake dial.....and some watches seem to have a second hand with the marker larger than others or is that particular to the date non date models...thanx
|December 17 2009, 8:08 AM |
Yes. There are several MK's and also service dials. More info will follow.
i've seen luminova dials labeled as tritium
|December 17 2009, 8:36 AM |
ala the rolex dials used from about 98-03, for the snowflakes. i had one in my hands that i wavered about keeping and returned because the glowing in the dark just didnt seem right. =)
<* shark >>><
Yes, Maxi Tudor Snowflake dials exist....
|December 17 2009, 8:39 AM |
That dial looks very "off" to me >>>
|December 17 2009, 11:10 AM |
especially the fonts. Why for example are the two 6's in 660 different shapes and sizes (the first 6 larger than the second, and the second 6 is more squat)? And why is the font altogether different for the word "SUBMARINER" where the fonts in that word are also different sizes from each other?
IMHO, it's a redial.
Well, the printing is exactly the same as early subs...
|December 17 2009, 11:25 AM |
(with around 1,5 mio serio no's) whereby the printing is not perfect but to me (& others) it's 100% correct. Thing is that this dial is very rare so not many others to compare to...
Pls check the link to earlier posts...this type of printing is extremely hard to copy and nobody would either redial a Rolex dial into a Tudor and with a different type of printing than the regular snowflake....
I'm not convinced. And that earlier thread was hardly conclusive >>>
|December 17 2009, 11:33 AM |
and if you look at the words TUDOR they are so off from any other Tudor sub dials I've seen (I have a MN Tudor Sub--pic is in the VRF Dial Archives). Notice how the "U" in TUDOR has one arm higher than the other and how the "O" in TUDOR isn't even symmetrical.
IMHO, it's a redial.
But if you're happy that's all that should matter to you.
For me there's too many excuses on that dial.
It always remains difficult to judge from an image...
|December 17 2009, 11:56 AM |
eg, the pics were taken with the crystal on it which deforms a bit... I was sceptical at first also, but only since there are not many others to compare it with (easy to judge negative when one has never seen a similar item before). I have and had a lot of snowflakes and one sees that the printing becomes better, smoother & tighter over the years. Again, pls compare with an early 5513... 100% the same.
In the end, each believes his own but I'm certain it's original.
VRF Contributing Member
This one looks very close >>>
|December 17 2009, 7:10 PM |
It is a 9401/0 an the dial looks close to me. =)
The fonts are very different from the dial you posted Dennis....
|December 18 2009, 8:02 AM |
.....On your dial the "O" in Tudor has very a very even thin top and bottom. Not to mention then even script in general.
More obvious is the different depht rating fonts. Having said all this I am not saying that the initail dial is a redial or fake or not original. Just pointing out the differences.