It’s about what you’re comfortable with. For me — too small. But, that’s only me. It’s your watch. 😁 (and I agree with the guy above… model hands)
So many things wrong with your argument — movement is 32111 and your link is for the 32110, not based on ETA 2824 but the 2892, not comparable to a SW200 as the movement is highly modified including a silicon escapement produced by another manufacturer. Just wanted to clarify some facts… even your source walks back their ETA claims here:
So here’s news to rock the discussion. Most pocket watch movements were sold separately from the cases. So the movement inside and the case that you find it it now is random — the case chosen was based on how much the customer wanted to pay back then. So this doesn’t really help solve the mystery. The only piece of the puzzle that we need is to know is what that marking in the middle of the dial is… And it’s too small for me to read. It doesn’t look like any of the classic American pocket watch brands.
This account is verified. WatchCrunch has confirmed that this account is the authentic presence for this person or brand.