221638090266
Class?
i dont know anything about this model, pray tell what is wrong, i cant wait to learn more. price looks out of line some what, and isnt 1990s better description??
that it's is not on my wrist? :shuc
The hour hand does not look correct when you compare it to the pictures on page 48-49 and 50 in the 1992 catalog. There is a bar across the width of the hour hand on the SSW in the ebay listing that Butch referenced but it is not shown on the SSW that Butch listed on this site on October 12th or on another current ebay SSW listing 271424963779. ;)
Quote from: incountry on December 17, 2014, 10:35:58 PM
The hour hand does not look correct when you compare it to the pictures on page 48-49 and 50 in the 1992 catalog. There is a bar across the width of the hour hand on the SSW in the ebay listing that Butch referenced but it is not shown on the SSW that Butch listed on this site on October 12th or on another current ebay SSW listing 271424963779. ;)
NOW we're cooking with gas.... Keep going.
:what :wehe good call incountry!! well, at least i was right about the date being the 1990s. butch, you mean there is MORE wrong??
I do this sort of thing to teach you guys how to recognize original pieces accurately. Without slamming the sellers of course. Most of them honestly do not know what they have.
We have not fully uncovered everything about this watch yet, just what it is not. I did think that it was going to take a VZ Team Member to completely figure it out though.
Second hand is incorrect also.
Quote from: dmh on December 18, 2014, 03:12:42 PM
Second hand is incorrect also.
Good catch DMH! I never noticed that while I was staring at the incorrect hour hand. Thanks for the brain teaser Butch; it keeps the juices flowing. :coolsmiley
Quote from: incountry on December 18, 2014, 06:03:01 PM
Quote from: dmh on December 18, 2014, 03:12:42 PM
Second hand is incorrect also.
Good catch DMH! I never noticed that while I was staring at the incorrect hour hand. Thanks for the brain teaser Butch; it keeps the juices flowing. :coolsmiley
You're getting colder. Go back and finished what you started...
The hour hand is wrong too. None of the hands are original.
Quote from: incountry on December 17, 2014, 10:35:58 PM
The hour hand does not look correct when you compare it to the pictures on page 48-49 and 50 in the 1992 catalog.
I did think that it was going to take a VZ Team Member to completely figure it out though. Go back and finished what you started...
I give up since I am almost cross eyed comparing this to an original.
Other than the wrong hands, I see nothing else wrong with the watch.
The kit has an added NATO strap in place of the original rubber strap extension.
But, the springbar tool looks to be original. A lot of these have been sold in the last couple of years with a cheap Chinese springbar tool in place of the original Swiss tool.
Make it easy on us Butch. Just tell us.
Quote from: dmh on December 19, 2014, 11:35:52 AM
Make it easy on us Butch. Just tell us.
Has anyone looked at the 2000 or 2001 (Genender) catalogs?
Also, if indeed NOS, who put and why is there a NATO trap in there?
I did look at the catalog. Nothing pokes me in the eye.
Everyone needs at least one or preferably more NATO straps. That just gives added value to the watch.
What I would like to know is where those hands came from. They don't look bad at all. But, according to the catalogs and all the examples I've had, they are not original.
Quote from: dmh on December 19, 2014, 01:05:04 PM
I did look at the catalog. Nothing pokes me in the eye.
Everyone needs at least one or preferably more NATO straps. That just gives added value to the watch.
What I would like to know is where those hands came from. They don't look bad at all. But, according to the catalogs and all the examples I've had, they are not original.
Exsqueeze me? Are you looking at page 8 of the year 2000 catalog? Same hand, including the seconds. Same band, which to me is the dead give away that it is a 2000 Genender model.
NOS is never sold, never worn. I have several.... AND I HAVE NEVER WORN THEM. So, how did the NATO strap get in there? It did not come with it. It is not explained. Makes me think that the watch was worn with that NATO strap and then the seller put the metal one back on there. But hey, I don't trust the people I know either. ;)
Hey man, it's just me, but this think ain't from the 80's.
For sure not from the 80's. I couldn't tell much about the hands from the picture in the catalog. So I did an image search. Found quite a few with the same hands. So the hands are correct for the latter model as is the bracelet. The picture shows it on someones wrist. I would not call it NOS since it has obviously been worn and to be new, it should be unworn per eBay's definition.
Hi dmh. I wanted to get back home and look at this before responding.
On the www.ZodiacCatalogs.com (http://www.zodiaccatalogs.com) site, if you put you browser into full screen mode, and then when viewing a catalog in the bottom bar click on the Zoom feature, it will show that watch on page 8 in the upper right hand corner in much larger detail. While not perfectly clear it is enough to see what you two guys were describing about the hands though. Let me know if this helped, I hope so.
Also here is the part of the band I spoke of that is the give away that it is a 2000 Genender model.
Quote from: Butch on December 20, 2014, 07:45:49 AM
Hi dmh. I wanted to get back home and look at this before responding.
On the www.ZodiacCatalogs.com (http://www.zodiaccatalogs.com) site, if you put you browser into full screen mode, and then when viewing a catalog in the bottom bar click on the Zoom feature, it will show that watch on page 8 in the upper right hand corner in much larger detail. While not perfectly clear it is enough to see what you two guys were describing about the hands though. Let me know if this helped, I hope so.
Also here is the part of the band I spoke of that is the give away that it is a 2000 Genender model.
That did clear it up a lot and I could tell the hands were the same. A lot of watches on eBay are dated wrong. I usually ignore their estimate of age or just take it with a grain of salt. But when one is advertised as NOS and there is a picture of it being worn, I just avoid it and move on to the next one.
I'm glad that worked better! Yeah, I do this mainly to stir up some interest and pass on some knowledge, I just make them/you work for it. I have no need to show off my vast knowledge. ;) I do keep hoping that one of the Silent Sallies here will jump in when they see something like this thread.
Good brain teaser Butch; it got me thinking AND using the catalogs.