My Vintage Watch Experience

Sapphire crystal you say....

That was your first clue.

99.4%

Second clue.

No scratches...well, that sounds to good to be true for that price. (See first clue. Trust me, there were scratches.)

The refund is the best you can do. Keep looking. There are good watches out there.

Those two local watchmakers are charging a lot for a non-luxury service. Every market is different, but you are in a large enough city that you should have options at multiple price points.

Sapphire crystal you say....

That was your first clue.

99.4%

Second clue.

No scratches...well, that sounds to good to be true for that price. (See first clue. Trust me, there were scratches.)

The refund is the best you can do. Keep looking. There are good watches out there.

Those two local watchmakers are charging a lot for a non-luxury service. Every market is different, but you are in a large enough city that you should have options at multiple price points.

Sapphire crystal you say....

That was your first clue.

99.4%

Second clue.

If you are so inclined Mr. @Aurelian, can you elaborate? 

I'm guessing the sapphire is because sapphire wasn't common in the 60's & 70's. 

But 6 issues out of a thousand seems good. No?

OP, head up, plenty more options out there, but yeah disappointing. 

Sapphire crystal has been around since the early 20th Century. There are several methods of creating them that are too technical for the purpose of this comment (or really for me to understand). Sapphire is more expensive, more brittle (likely to shatter) and less likely to scratch.

The first watch to use sapphire was JLC in the 30's. Omega experimented with it in the 60's. This is one of those innovations that we really can give credit to Rolex for popularizing. In 1970 Rolex began the use of sapphire and I think that by the 1980's their entire line featured sapphire. Rolex made thicker sapphire crystals that were less likely to shatter. The thickness also increased the cost, already much higher than acrylic or mineral glass.

The evolution of crystals available to the consumer was glass, acrylic, mineral glass, and then sapphire crystal. Acrylic was the crystal of choice for watch manufacturers from the 1950's until very recently. When we complain about getting sapphire on a $300 microbrand diver and not on a $500 Seiko this must be understood to be a very recent complaint.  It is within the past few years that sapphire was cost effective for anything that was not a considered a luxury watch. 

The point of my original comment was that Certina in the 1970's most certainly used acrylic. If a watch from that era is said to have sapphire, that sapphire is a later addition. Acrylic crystals are cheap to replace (around $20) and most skilled watchmakers can make them fit with no problem. Sapphire is less forgiving and must be exactly the right size. An improperly fitted crystal can catch on the hands or in extreme cases distort the case and dial. I replace acrylic with acrylic and always have some Polywatch around.

About the rating: I don't know if there were a thousand ratings or transactions. I do know that motivated sellers move Heaven and Earth to maintain their 100% rating. A seller that has allowed their rating to slip past 99.9% (perfection can't always be achieved) has left some unhappy buyers with unresolved issues. If the buyer makes unreasonable demands the seller can have a negative rating removed. Those ratings are artificial. Given that they are not a real representation of all of the cumulative events, it is best to err on the side of sellers who make a real effort to keep their rating artificially high.

Old watches that have been worn have dings and blemishes. If you are going to be a vintage type you have to accept imperfection.  I perhaps accept too much (@Velomax , @SurferJohn  😉). An old watch without scratches has either been polished or re-plated. Neither is necessarily bad, as long as it is disclosed.

This is what I would tell anyone getting into vintage. Start cheap: $100 or less for the watch, $200.00 or less for the service that it will need sooner than later. Don't expect a 50 year old watch to be a daily, it should be an occasional piece. Look at movements, even if you don't know what you are looking at. Patina is ok, rust is not. Ticking is not running. Don't get discouraged. Research the watch and the seller. Find two kinds of local watchmakers (just like mechanics): one for the service of a really nice watch and one that can get a Vostok running for less than $50.00.

Sapphire crystal has been around since the early 20th Century. There are several methods of creating them that are too technical for the purpose of this comment (or really for me to understand). Sapphire is more expensive, more brittle (likely to shatter) and less likely to scratch.

The first watch to use sapphire was JLC in the 30's. Omega experimented with it in the 60's. This is one of those innovations that we really can give credit to Rolex for popularizing. In 1970 Rolex began the use of sapphire and I think that by the 1980's their entire line featured sapphire. Rolex made thicker sapphire crystals that were less likely to shatter. The thickness also increased the cost, already much higher than acrylic or mineral glass.

The evolution of crystals available to the consumer was glass, acrylic, mineral glass, and then sapphire crystal. Acrylic was the crystal of choice for watch manufacturers from the 1950's until very recently. When we complain about getting sapphire on a $300 microbrand diver and not on a $500 Seiko this must be understood to be a very recent complaint.  It is within the past few years that sapphire was cost effective for anything that was not a considered a luxury watch. 

The point of my original comment was that Certina in the 1970's most certainly used acrylic. If a watch from that era is said to have sapphire, that sapphire is a later addition. Acrylic crystals are cheap to replace (around $20) and most skilled watchmakers can make them fit with no problem. Sapphire is less forgiving and must be exactly the right size. An improperly fitted crystal can catch on the hands or in extreme cases distort the case and dial. I replace acrylic with acrylic and always have some Polywatch around.

About the rating: I don't know if there were a thousand ratings or transactions. I do know that motivated sellers move Heaven and Earth to maintain their 100% rating. A seller that has allowed their rating to slip past 99.9% (perfection can't always be achieved) has left some unhappy buyers with unresolved issues. If the buyer makes unreasonable demands the seller can have a negative rating removed. Those ratings are artificial. Given that they are not a real representation of all of the cumulative events, it is best to err on the side of sellers who make a real effort to keep their rating artificially high.

Old watches that have been worn have dings and blemishes. If you are going to be a vintage type you have to accept imperfection.  I perhaps accept too much (@Velomax , @SurferJohn  😉). An old watch without scratches has either been polished or re-plated. Neither is necessarily bad, as long as it is disclosed.

This is what I would tell anyone getting into vintage. Start cheap: $100 or less for the watch, $200.00 or less for the service that it will need sooner than later. Don't expect a 50 year old watch to be a daily, it should be an occasional piece. Look at movements, even if you don't know what you are looking at. Patina is ok, rust is not. Ticking is not running. Don't get discouraged. Research the watch and the seller. Find two kinds of local watchmakers (just like mechanics): one for the service of a really nice watch and one that can get a Vostok running for less than $50.00.

@Aurelian 

Oh I'm not that picky, I just could not help myself to make a comment on your "plucked from the sea floor" watch.  Where is that watch, did I insult it into hiding?  Despite the implications of that comment it is a fact that I do enjoy a vintage watch that has a nice even patina.  That can't be recreated; only time and use can do that.  What a really don't like is over restoring an old watch to make it look new.  Ultimately, its all personal choice in the end.

Sapphire crystal has been around since the early 20th Century. There are several methods of creating them that are too technical for the purpose of this comment (or really for me to understand). Sapphire is more expensive, more brittle (likely to shatter) and less likely to scratch.

The first watch to use sapphire was JLC in the 30's. Omega experimented with it in the 60's. This is one of those innovations that we really can give credit to Rolex for popularizing. In 1970 Rolex began the use of sapphire and I think that by the 1980's their entire line featured sapphire. Rolex made thicker sapphire crystals that were less likely to shatter. The thickness also increased the cost, already much higher than acrylic or mineral glass.

The evolution of crystals available to the consumer was glass, acrylic, mineral glass, and then sapphire crystal. Acrylic was the crystal of choice for watch manufacturers from the 1950's until very recently. When we complain about getting sapphire on a $300 microbrand diver and not on a $500 Seiko this must be understood to be a very recent complaint.  It is within the past few years that sapphire was cost effective for anything that was not a considered a luxury watch. 

The point of my original comment was that Certina in the 1970's most certainly used acrylic. If a watch from that era is said to have sapphire, that sapphire is a later addition. Acrylic crystals are cheap to replace (around $20) and most skilled watchmakers can make them fit with no problem. Sapphire is less forgiving and must be exactly the right size. An improperly fitted crystal can catch on the hands or in extreme cases distort the case and dial. I replace acrylic with acrylic and always have some Polywatch around.

About the rating: I don't know if there were a thousand ratings or transactions. I do know that motivated sellers move Heaven and Earth to maintain their 100% rating. A seller that has allowed their rating to slip past 99.9% (perfection can't always be achieved) has left some unhappy buyers with unresolved issues. If the buyer makes unreasonable demands the seller can have a negative rating removed. Those ratings are artificial. Given that they are not a real representation of all of the cumulative events, it is best to err on the side of sellers who make a real effort to keep their rating artificially high.

Old watches that have been worn have dings and blemishes. If you are going to be a vintage type you have to accept imperfection.  I perhaps accept too much (@Velomax , @SurferJohn  😉). An old watch without scratches has either been polished or re-plated. Neither is necessarily bad, as long as it is disclosed.

This is what I would tell anyone getting into vintage. Start cheap: $100 or less for the watch, $200.00 or less for the service that it will need sooner than later. Don't expect a 50 year old watch to be a daily, it should be an occasional piece. Look at movements, even if you don't know what you are looking at. Patina is ok, rust is not. Ticking is not running. Don't get discouraged. Research the watch and the seller. Find two kinds of local watchmakers (just like mechanics): one for the service of a really nice watch and one that can get a Vostok running for less than $50.00.

@Aurelian As a matter of fact, the 288 did have sapphire...

https://www.vintagecertinas.ch/en/288eng/

@romaker I think the 500 euro estimate was absolutely off the trolley. If a ton of parts needs to be replaced, of course it's not impossible that the servicing bill will reach that sum. However, them assuming immediately that it will without having inspected it thoroughly is, well, crazy. A local watchmaker whose services I used before has increased his prices, but hasn't become 500 euro kind of greedy...