Finepics Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Just ordered my 87 from Josh and was doing a little digging to find the faults. It's very very good - but, and here's the rub, look at the markers at the 8 and 10 position - they are twisted out of alignment. Why oh why unless it is just this one that is like it (this is a factory photo and is the same as all the dealers pics). The dial is at least blue and you can just see the date font which looks to be the correct font. The caseback shows it as a C series and if that were the case then it would be a PAM 64 with the silver/grey sub dial and black dial. The 87 appeared with the blue dial as a D series which then got much darker with the F series. Damn - there's always something but still a must have and the markers can be straightened. Oh yes - the bezel markers need a little polishing as they are not brushed. One big question is if the "La Bomba" has a 5mm crystal????? Just spotted that the dial is a T dial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Usil Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Yes, but look at that crown. Sweet. Usil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 I noticed the series issue as well. Can you really straighten the markers? That would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finepics Posted August 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 I noticed the series issue as well. Can you really straighten the markers? That would be great. Well they usually have 2 little pins on the back that locate in holes in the dial. If mine comes like this then it will maybe need one of the pins (if there are 2) removing and the marker glueing onto the dial with a tiny drop of epoxy glue. Still not sure if that crystal is a 5mm job - I bet it's not!! Shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrono903 Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 i noticed too which led me to this pic: the markers also are all the same size and replace the hash marks they represent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finepics Posted August 27, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 i noticed too which led me to this pic: the markers also are all the same size and replace the hash marks they represent. That is a later E or F series which has larger markers at the 8 and 10. The dial and markers of the rep 87 are correct (although as I have already said the C serial number indicates that it would be the caseback for a PAM 64) - it's that in the pic of the rep the 8 and 10 are twisted slightly and I have no idea why. They are shorter to clear the sub dial but no reason for them to twist as they would not touch it if they were straight. Here is the gen: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Actually according to La Cote des Mortes chart it is the difference between the 87A and 87B, The A has the shorter marker and bluer (less black) dial. 87A: 87B: The 10 o'clock marker is still askew though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrono903 Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 That is a later E or F series which has larger markers at the 8 and 10. The dial and markers of the rep 87 are correct (although as I have already said the C serial number indicates that it would be the caseback for a PAM 64) - it's that in the pic of the rep the 8 and 10 are twisted slightly and I have no idea why. They are shorter to clear the sub dial but no reason for them to twist as they would not touch it if they were straight. Here is the gen: Aren't we past "H" series already? If this is an E or an F why so far behind? I will wait. This could be great if they made the one in my pic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Chrono- I suspect you are longing for an F series. The rep being sold should probably be marked as a D or E. Finepics is right that that the C is the 64 (black) and the first 87 with the short marker is a D. Since the F is where PAM significantly darkened the dial and the one you are showing shows a corrected marker but still lighter dial (I think?) I will guess you are longing for the E and the rep should be marked D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrono903 Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 Chrono- I suspect you are longing for an F series. The rep being sold should probably be marked as a D or E. Finepics is right that that the C is the 64 (black) and the first 87 with the short marker is a D. Since the F is where PAM significantly darkened the dial and the one you are showing shows a corrected marker but still lighter dial (I think?) I will guess you are longing for the E and the rep should be marked D. Kruzer, Thanks for clearing that up. I do prefer the darker dial and longer indices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faber Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 i really have tried to read all this info...but damn chrono your babies makes me look always to your avatar and your signature Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finepics Posted August 27, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 i really have tried to read all this info...but damn chrono your babies makes me look always to your avatar and your signature They are blindingly good!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrono903 Posted August 27, 2006 Report Share Posted August 27, 2006 (edited) you guys are good! if you wanna see something funny, right click on them and save as your desktop. Edited August 27, 2006 by chrono903 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www_watch Posted August 28, 2006 Report Share Posted August 28, 2006 Too bad that the caseback isn't correct. Because I just noticed that at least the two watches pictured by Andrew and Joshua have different serial No's Maybe another individual job like on the 187's? Or prototype issues only? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.