Anyone tell me anything about my Tudor oyster date?

First of all - the watch is a really bad redial. The lumed markers at 12 and 6 are completely misaligned in relation to the minute track. The "Swiss" at the bottom - also misaligned. The font used for "Oysterdate" is completely wrong. The hands are mismatched. I'd like to see the inside of it, and more of the case back, because this also looks fishy.

Of course, the California dial here is some half-baked handyman's fantasy creation.

I'm sorry, but this watch is either an example of badly botched restoration, or a total fake - although I'd need to have a look inside (movement and inside of the case back) to be sure.

Disclaimer: everything that I know about Tudor I learned from the internet.

The handset doesn't look like anything Tudor ever put on a watch, not even in the go-go 1970's. I would expect to see a cyclops over the date. The date wheel is off. Tudor did not use a date complication with an oyster movement in the 1940's, that came in the 1950's.

There is no similar picture on the internet because this watch in its present form was never sold by Tudor. It is a jeweler recasing or worse.

I found a pic of the movement but not the inside of the case back, I’m aware the handset doesn’t look right and really do appreciate the feedback.

I know it’s not a great photo and I’ll try and get a better one once I can get the back off again

I'm pretty convinced now that it's a total fake. The movement is an ETA of the 245X series. That was used by Tudor, as cal.2483. However, the Tudor-modified 245X-series ETAs had considerably better finishing than this, notably the central portion of the rotor had a circular version of the Geneva stripes pattern. I can clearly see an Incabloc shock device in the photo. This isn't right, the 2483 had KIF anti-shock protection - notably the Flector and Ultraflex.

I've also never seen a 2483 signed just "TUDOR" like this one. Rotors on the 2483 were signed "TUDOR AUTO PRINCE" or "MONTRES TUDOR SA GENEVA."

The 2483 calibre marking should be visible on the baseplate to the left of the balance wheel. It's not there in this case.

Fake. I'm sorry.

Oh wow - this thread took an odd direction that I wasn’t expecting from the initial pictures. It does look a little suspect, but here is the question that I want to ask - what is your history with this watch, what does it mean to you? It seems odd that someone would go to a lot of effort to make such an old Tudor, so what is the story behind it?

I was gifted it by the family of a former watch dealer as I really like a california dial, I had it cleaned and serviced and was told it dated from approx 1947 and the eta movement and everything was right, especially as it has the older rose and shield. So was excited to share this little part of my collection. I know it's not the shiniest example but now feel a little deflated thinking it's not genuine at all. Thanks for all the comments and I will share other pieces over time

It’s still pretty cool watch - I would keep it. get a cool brown leather nato or a dark green nato and rock the shit out of it. realistically even If it’s from 1947 - that’s 75 years no doubt work was done on it.

Definitely not from 1947. The ETA 245X series was introduced in the mid 1950s. No idea how this watch was dated. But if there is a serial no. on the case pointing to 1947, that'd mean the case is likely fake as well. There'd simply be no Tudor case to house an ETA 2451 or any of its derivatives. Until the 1960s, Tudor's auto movement of choice was the cal.390, made for Tudor by Fabrique d'Ebauches Fleurier (FEF).

My first impression was "Mumbai Special", as non-PC as that may sound.