Isn't it awful that confronted by an immaculate TAG Heuer 3000 Series from the 1980s I immediately become suspicious? I guess that's what happens when you spend too long on eBay and read too many forum posts! Not that I'm suggesting that this watch is fake, after all I'm sure there are easier ways to make money than faking 30 year old TAG Heuers... but still, I can't help but wonder exactly what it is that I'm looking at here...
Were it being sold complete with it's original gold plated bracelet I could easily believe this watch has never been out of its box, but it isn't and as far as I'm aware this watch was never sold on any kind of leather strap. Sure you can find plenty being sold on straps now, because the bracelets got too small or too knackered, but not in the 1980s. So either it's truly mint but for some reason the seller doesn't have the bracelet, or it's been refurbished (albeit to what looks like a very high standard).
This one actually sold on eBay a few weeks ago for the paltry sum of £399, at least it seems paltry to me - even without its bracelet; 3000 Series watches are plentiful on eBay, but not the chronograph variety and not in this condition. And to be fair, the black leather strap kinda suits it - but for me, not this particular leather strap.
I don't know what the deal is with these funny little stitch things, it seems like it's a 'thing' nowadays, and on the right watch I guess it looks okay, say if you have a re-edition Carrera or something, but this watch doesn't require this sort of strap, it's just not right. Watch straps in the 80s were padded and had stitching up the wazoo... maybe even stripes.
Okay stripes is a step too far and this sleek black number does lend this watch a certain level of classic elegance, but those white stitches are still a bum note for me.
I have a real affinity for the 3000 Series and I would love a chronograph version, but looking at this watch I'm not overly keen on that smaller subdial at the 12 position. I can see that they didn't want to lose the triangle and that would have looked a bit odd, but making the subdial smaller gives the impression (to me anyway) that it's sliding down the dial. Maybe it's something you get used to, a bit like this older Monacos with the non-symmetrical dials? On the other hand the other subdials look a bit too large, running all the way to the edge of the dial - maybe there could have been a happy medium somewhere?
Oddly, I've just come across a listing for this very watch on Watchcharts.com (which I've never heard of before) and while it's listed as sold the listing is still there if you want to take a look...
https://watchcharts.com/listing/621815
No comments:
Post a Comment