S.58 With Cal 2542pc

LouS
Posts
6,713
Likes
18,550
Gavin Gavin
Saw this and am keen to chase. Any opinion on this?

Pretty good, I think. There are some atypical features (any case number is unusual, the grain at the bottom of the caseback "S58", a few other details) but I don't see anything to preclude this from being original. Will generate a lot of interest.
 
Gavin
Posts
2,399
Likes
4,472
LouS LouS
Will generate a lot of interest.
That's what I am afraid of. Thanks Lou.
 
Stewart H
Posts
3,070
Likes
3,526
Gavin Gavin
Saw this and am keen to chase. Any opinion on this?

This is an interesting one. The S58 allegedly refers to being made in 1958 and as Lou says, doesn't usually have a case number. I have always been sceptical about the ones you see with 133.8 movements, purely because Rossler only mentions them being made with the 120 movement (and that is hand wound). At least the 133.8 would fit with the year.

As I see this one, it has a case number from the mid 60s and a movement from the same period which leads me to call the authenticity of the dial and the S58 on the case back into question.

I could be completely wrong but more than one irregularity........
 
Gavin
Posts
2,399
Likes
4,472
Stewart H Stewart H
This is an interesting one. The S58 allegedly refers to being made in 1958 and as Lou says, doesn't usually have a case number. I have always been sceptical about the ones you see with 133.8 movements, purely because Rossler only mentions them being made with the 120 movement (and that is hand wound). At least the 133.8 would fit with the year.

As I see this one, it has a case number from the mid 60s and a movement from the same period which leads me to call the authenticity of the dial and the S58 on the case back into question.

I could be completely wrong but more than one irregularity........
Thanks Stewart. One question, are you saying an S58 should not have an 133.8 as I have seen a few with them.
 
Stewart H
Posts
3,070
Likes
3,526
Gavin Gavin
Thanks Stewart. One question, are you saying an S58 should not have an 133.8 as I have seen a few with them.
To be honest Gavin, I'm not sure as like you, I have seen a few advertised. The only firm research on the S58 that I have seen is Rossler (but we know that there are gaps in his book) so that's not to say that the 133.8s are definely wrong 'uns, but does flag a potential warning. I guess the only way to find out for sure would be to ask the Big Z themselves. Now if anybody has any catalogues from 1958 - 1960 that could indicate the inclusion of an automatic S58, that would prove the 133.8s to be legitimate as the only autos made at that time were the 133.8 and the 71 which is a 133.8 with date complication.
 
LouS
Posts
6,713
Likes
18,550
Stewart, do you think it's possible for a franken-izer to jam a 133.8/71 into a movement cavity made for a 120? Don't you think it would require rather a radical case reworking? I'm not sure of the dimensions myself, but it seems like that oscillating weight takes a meaningful amount of extra room.

Another observation about the watch in question - based on the endpiece fit as shown in the pics, I'm not sure the bracelet is original to the piece.
 
Stewart H
Posts
3,070
Likes
3,526
LouS LouS
Stewart, do you think it's possible for a franken-izer to jam a 133.8/71 into a movement cavity made for a 120? Don't you think it would require rather a radical case reworking? I'm not sure of the dimensions myself, but it seems like that oscillating weight takes a meaningful amount of extra room.

Another observation about the watch in question - based on the endpiece fit as shown in the pics, I'm not sure the bracelet is original to the piece.
Interesting point Luo. It will have to wait until the weekend but I'll have a little play with a 133.8 and a 120. Uncase both movements and see if they would fit into each other's home.
 
Gavin
Posts
2,399
Likes
4,472
Stewart H Stewart H
Interesting point Luo. It will have to wait until the weekend but I'll have a little play with a 133.8 and a 120. Uncase both movements and see if they would fit into each other's home.
Looking forward to your findings.:thumbsup:
 
Stewart H
Posts
3,070
Likes
3,526
Conundrum solved without resorting to the sledge hammer and crowbar. I just popped the backs off of the two and the 120 is 12"' whereas the 133.8 is 13"'. So, it wont fit. Re-reading Rossler (p147) the entire production run of 120s was bought by our old friend Signore Ciarelli for the Italian navy. Those boys were certainly spoiled - considering their track record, he should have bought Timex.

Then, to quote Rossler, "2 years later an automatic model followed".

Accordingly I now eat humble pie and accept the authenticity of the 133.8 in an S58. I do though, still question the 2542PC which started production in 1964.
 
LouS
Posts
6,713
Likes
18,550
Stewart H Stewart H
I do though, still question the 2542PC which started production in 1964.

OK, so does a 25x2PC fit in a 133.8 hole?
 
Stewart H
Posts
3,070
Likes
3,526
Well the 25x2 movements are 11.5"', so there would be no trouble fitting it in the hole. It would need a casing ring or spacer to fill the gap with the extra 3.35mm diameter.
 
Gavin
Posts
2,399
Likes
4,472
SOLD today for USD 2949
12946


rather an eye-opening price!
My jaw dropped when I saw that. Plenty of interest. Anyone here?
 
dsio
Posts
28,720
Likes
34,938
Damn... that's serious change
 
Stewart H
Posts
3,070
Likes
3,526
Having seen a photograph of an old catalogue yesterday, I am happy to admit that my reservations about the S58 with a 2452 PC were wrong. They were selling for 350 Francs.
 
sohail
Posts
445
Likes
155
Hi some quoted me an s.58 with rotating bezel and 2532 pc movement . Is it possible?
 
2 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...