Sigma dial question

[mcshal]

Hey folks, I’ve got a ‘72 1500...cool taupe dial, great shape, everything is lovely..but the sigma markings are a smidge asymmetrical/imperfect. Has anyone ever seen this before? Seems like a strange thing to fake, just adding a sigma to an otherwise all authentic watch. Perhaps it was done after everything else on the dial? Any experience/thoughts/opinions are welcome.

[wjviper]

Looks good to me!

[TuRo]

It's spot on sir

[MrBlobby]

Σσς Sigma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sigma_uc_lc.svg

[mcshal]

Thanks for the affirmation (and indulgence), everyone. It’s a cool piece.

[Dan S]

The sigma symbols look fine to me. However, IMO it's a little unusual to see so much oxidation on the hands of a sigma-dial watch.

[mcshal]

Hi dan, my experience says the same, but in my understanding it’s not uncommon to have a sigma dial that has gold indices but steel (and more susceptible to corrosion) hands.
especially in the early ones. Also obviously possible that the hands are later replacements, but the patina on the lume matches pretty spot on.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by mcshal

in my understanding it’s not uncommon to have a sigma dial that has gold indices but steel (and more susceptible to corrosion) hands.
especially in the early ones.

Thanks, I didn't know that.

[TuRo]

Yes agree, slight misnomer white gold hands always with white gold sigma dial. Eg non-big red (my preferred dial) Sigma Daytonas are steel I think too.

[rootbeer7]

Looking back at 2 sigma dials I had (1625 & 1601), the seconds hand seemed to corrode more than the other 2.