When was this Tudor made?

[PeterT]

Hi,
This is the watch that generated my interest in watches. It belonged to my Grandfather who died many years ago. It was given to me and as it was "old fashioned" it just sat in my drawer gathering dust.






My wife bought an old ladies Tudor and so I started to do a bit of research.

Whilst you might be disapponted, I had the dial refinished as it was badly marked and decayed in a number of places with the lums partly dropped out of the hands and I wanted a watch that could be worn. The watch was serviced at the same time and keeps pretty good time. The case is SS and the crown is not screw down.
On the back of the watch there is an inscription indicating it was presented in 1949. However after looking on Ebay for some time Tudor watches of the same apparent period appear to be more modern looking.
So any information about the watch would be excellent.
Thank you,
Peter

[adam78]

I see nothing that would dissuade me that it isn't indeed a late '40s Tudor. The dial refinish looks to be of high quality (does it closely match the original design?), but it is a shame you did not leave the dial as it was (having the hands relumed is not as big a deal) -- not that it would necessarily have a big impact on value (for a watch such as this the difference would not be terribly significant), but for sentimental reasons that it was your grandfather's watch, though of course that's a personal sentiment. As it is not an Oyster, it does not have a screw-down crown, and screw-in case back, but likely a simple snap-on case back, and very possibly was cased in the UK (inner case back might give a clue). Non-Oysters unfortunately are not as well documented re: case reference numbers and SNs.

[PeterT]

Thank you for the reply, Adam.
I thought carefully about the dial for some time. As I do not intend selling the watch and the fact that my eldest son is a watchaholic too it will stay in the family. It will be his Great Grandfathers watch. So the dial refurb seemed to be the best option. When it lurked in my sock drawer for many years it looked very sad with the marks and scratches on the dial. I asked about having the hands re lumed locally and the paint on offer was a totally unsuitable colour.
So I sent it away and kept my fingers crossed until it came back again. I was more than pleased with the result and so spent a bit of time cleaning up the case with Cape cod.
It comes out for a few days wear every so often.

P.

[jdc]

a very sympathetic restoration, very nice

[Alcan]

Originally Posted by PeterT

Whilst you might be disapponted, I had the dial refinished as it was badly marked and decayed in a number of places with the lums partly dropped out of the hands and I wanted a watch that could be worn.

Peter, that redial looks really good to me, they did a nice job on it.

Originally Posted by PeterT

it was presented in 1949.

The time frame would be about right as the Tudor line was launched in 1946.

[adam78]

Originally Posted by PeterT

I asked about having the hands re lumed locally and the paint on offer was a totally unsuitable colour.
So I sent it away and kept my fingers crossed until it came back again. I was more than pleased with the result and so spent a bit of time cleaning up the case with Cape cod.
It comes out for a few days wear every so often.

P.

Yes, as redials go, this one is very nice. It looks like they used an "aged radium" color.

[PeterT]

Originally Posted by adam78

Yes, as redials go, this one is very nice. It looks like they used an "aged radium" color.

Yes I asked for it to look as realisic as possible bearing in mind the watch was 60 years old.

P.

[T5AUS]

Nice job Peter, are you able to say who did the work for you