Do you like your vintage watch to be polished or not?
Yesterday I got my new Seiko SKX023J and had to try it out.
Here are some specs:
The watch was build in 1996 and got restored.
The case is original and has only been slightly polished and cleaned.
The dial and handset is original and has been cleaned too.
The indices and hands were filled with new luminous fluid.
The watch has a new bezel insert, crystal and a new crown.
I really like the slim case size of 37mm and the dive style bezel.
What do you think of polished watches?
6 comments
Sort by
Ihno
I‘m new to the watchgame.
Schleswig-Holstein
Member since
Last active: 4 days ago
6.10” / 15.50 cm
It’s really nice 👌
Personally for me I would say no to publishing a vintage watch. Scratches give it character and most of the time vintage watches in orginal form are worth more in value.
I have no issues with polishing and bringing an old watch back to its former glory. In principle. I don’t mind buffing, I don’t mind crystal replacement, I don’t mind parts replacement that are not era-correct. But I do draw the line at retouching the dial. The dial should stay unadulterated and unaltered.
My bigger issue is calling a watch from the 90s vintage. I realize the 90s is 30 years ago. I know that the consensus is that anything 25 years and older is considered vintage. My head agrees but my heart says no. In 2050 when I’m 75 years I still won’t accept that the 90s is vintage.
My lawyer is a bit of a watch enthusiast, often emails me when he seeks an opinion about some watch related matter, but generally follows his own path. Last summer he had the opportunity to buy a well worn Rolex Air King with a gold bezel that was part of an estate settlement that his office was working on, in fact the watch was a 1/4 century reward to a gent employed by Coca Cola Canada, very cool item that I made a trip to his office to check out. The watch needed a full service but I cautioned my friend about instructions to Rolex Canada where he intended to refresh the watch. When I met him recently the watch was not recognizable including the original engraved caseback had been replaced with a new plain Rolex one that fitted, pretty certain the hour and minute hands were replaced watch and bracelet were lightly buffed, the watch looked slightly Franken but still a nice piece that had most of its value to some collector blasted away. Apparently he intends to give the watch to one of his daughters so it is fine. I stopped collecting vintage because I like to age my watches myself did not enjoy the many debates about how much to do not to do with items that I used to pick up.
I have no issues with polishing and bringing an old watch back to its former glory. In principle. I don’t mind buffing, I don’t mind crystal replacement, I don’t mind parts replacement that are not era-correct. But I do draw the line at retouching the dial. The dial should stay unadulterated and unaltered.
My bigger issue is calling a watch from the 90s vintage. I realize the 90s is 30 years ago. I know that the consensus is that anything 25 years and older is considered vintage. My head agrees but my heart says no. In 2050 when I’m 75 years I still won’t accept that the 90s is vintage.
👆🏻what he said 🙃
I have no issues with polishing and bringing an old watch back to its former glory. In principle. I don’t mind buffing, I don’t mind crystal replacement, I don’t mind parts replacement that are not era-correct. But I do draw the line at retouching the dial. The dial should stay unadulterated and unaltered.
My bigger issue is calling a watch from the 90s vintage. I realize the 90s is 30 years ago. I know that the consensus is that anything 25 years and older is considered vintage. My head agrees but my heart says no. In 2050 when I’m 75 years I still won’t accept that the 90s is vintage.
I say 90s is Neo Vintage.