Jump to content

Interesting A.T.P Unitas WW2 watch on eBay


Recommended Posts

I have two of these Unitas A.T.P.  WW2 army issue watches (plus a spare movement), which I bought a few years ago - for about £100 each, if memory serves. There's one currently on eBay at:

Unitas A.T.P watch

Asking price? A cool £450. There are a couple of others also currently on eBay for a more realistic £30 or £40 - they'll probably go for around £100 or so at auction end. Now, the case back of the £450 watch has the letters "HMS HOOD" scratched roughly into the back. Which strikes me as odd. Why? The Hood, as I'm sure we all know, was sunk in 1941 by the Bismarck - with just 3 survivors. There's no acknowledgement of the ship's history or any other provenance in the eBay listing. (Like all their adverts on eBay, the Vintage Watch Company never post photos of the movements - which is annoying and why I've never bought from them).

Hmm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do I, Geo. I know I'm a bit paranoid about possible cons on eBay, and I could well be suspecting something from nothing, but it strikes me as a little odd.

[After edit]

Here's one of mine by the way - Unitas clearly marked on the face. They're lovely little movements, well made and keep good time. Hacking as well. I've got a new strap for it, but kept the original 1940 strap as a souvenir.

 

 

Unitas 173 1940 case outer.JPG

Unitas 173 1940 face 2.JPG

Unitas 173 1940 movement.JPG

Unitas 173 1940 old strap.JPG

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The website they have is very interesting again not a single picture of a watch movement, its filled with a lot of guff about why wristwatches are a sound investment, but at the prices they are charging you would have to wait generations before your family saw any return on your sound investment.

http://www.vintagewatchshop.com/about-us

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. I've seen one or two watches on their website, over the years, that interested me. However, whenever I contacted them to ask if they would be able to post a photo of a particular movement, I got shrugged off with something like it was too much bother. Other sellers have been more accommodating in doing so.

How the devil do they expect a reasonably serious collector to pay reasonably serious money for a watch when you can't see the movement condition?

:thumbsd:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is interesting to note the complete absence of lume on either the dial or the hands.

Where as lume has a tendency to fall out of the hands over time, it is usually more resilient on the dial, but even where it does all come off the dial there would be evidence of where it had been.

If you look at Will's rather nice example you can clearly see that the dial printing includes printed outlines for the dial painter to fill with lume. Even after the lume had all gone the outlines would still be there.

I don't believe that the dial ever had lume applied, yet the open frame hands would have had lume. Luminous hands without luminous dial markers would be a pretty dumb combination so I'm happy that there is a complete mis-match between dial and hands.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a common mistake, Anil - or misdirection. A.T.P. does indeed stand for "Army Trade Pattern". There were many ATPs at that time, for all sorts of pieces of equipment - essentially sets of specifications for various manufacturers to make the same thing, That's why A.T.P. watches were supplied by different manufacturers such as Unitas, Leonidas, Omega, Rolex, etc.

I'm not totally sure, but I was under the impression that there were different specifications for the different branches of the Service - RAF specs were different from Army, which were different from the Navy - and different again for the submarine service. I think it would have been unusual for a watch marked A.T.P. to have been issued to a navy man - but I'm happy to stand corrected!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WillFly said:

Now, the case back of the £450 watch has the letters "HMS HOOD" scratched roughly into the back. Which strikes me as odd. Why? The Hood, as I'm sure we all know, was sunk in 1941 by the Bismarck - with just 3 survivors. There's no acknowledgement of the ship's history or any other provenance in the eBay listing. (Like all their adverts on eBay, the Vintage Watch Company never post photos of the movements - which is annoying and why I've never bought from them).

Hmm...

I do see the broad arrow acceptance mark on it but I find its rather dubious, the broad arrow is very small on the eBay watch and the engraved ATP letters look too crisp and modern after so many years of use, compare the ATP and broad arrow stamp (which would have been placed on after the serial number) with the faint serial number. I also have reservations on the stainless steel marking. 

Compare for yourself with bonafide WW2 watches (below)

The ebay "HMS Hood"

s-l1600.jpg

 

540x360.jpg

undated Ebel model: https://www.the-saleroom.com/it-it/auction-catalogues/fellows-and-sons/catalogue-id-srfel10125/lot-609c306c-09f3-48f8-9cfb-a46e010f17b1 

IMG_5365.JPG

The above model is a 1944 watch: http://goldsmithworks.com/APPRAISAL/APRIL-12/RARE-1944-WWII-BRITISH-MILITARY-REVUE-SPORT-ATP-BROAD-ARROW.htm 

 

$_57.JPG

 http://www.mwrforum.net/forums/showthread.php?72073-Images-from-past-auctions 

 

 

 

 

$_57 (1).JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I have read some suggestions that it can cause wear , particularly on the fork horns of a fully treated pallet fork. I've had half a kilo of steriac acid powder on a shelf for almost a year now, might have a little play today with a heater and a jar.  I think its because it gets into their cleaning solutions Mike. Theirs or anyone else's that services the watch next time, or if they need to strip back and rebuild. Could preclean but thats all time for a pro. I thought the idea was for the epilame to create a barrier, a wall between the lubrication and anything else, so the lube cant spread.
    • As I'm only cleaning watches in small numbers at home, I pre-clean any significant deposits of old grease and oil before using the cleaning solutions. I scrape off deposits with pegwood and Rodico, and if really dirty, wash parts in naphtha with a brush.  So I'm happy using DX, but can understand why it's avoided by the pros.
    • I think attaching a nut to the lid to pull it off is the least destructive, any damage damage on the outside is going to an easier fix than any created when trying to push it out from the inside. Scratching up the inside of the lid , mainspring or arbor bearing will be risk. Just my opinion.
    • yes the things we read in the universe I did see some where it was either difficult to clean off or it contaminated the cleaning fluid there was some issue with cleaning. I was trying to remember something about grease where as opposed to a substance of a specific consistency they were suggesting it had a base oil with something to thicken it. That conceivably could indicate that the two could separate and that would be an issue. But there is something else going on here that I had remembered so I have a link below and the description of the 9501 notice the word that I highlighted? Notice that word appears quite a bit on this particular page like 9415 has that property all so they 8200 mainspring grease and that definitely has to be mixed up when you go to use it because it definitely separates. just in case you didn't remember that nifty word there is a Wikipedia entry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thixotropy   https://www.moebius-lubricants.ch/en/products/greases I wonder if what you're seeing is the boron nitride left behind after cleaning. In other words it's the high-pressure part of the grease and it's probably embedding itself into the metal which is why it doesn't clean off and shouldn't be a problem?
    • Yes and no. I use Moebius 9501 synthetic grease and it is significantly runnier than the Moebius 9504 synthetic grease (and I assume Molykote DX) that I previously used. I haven't seen 9504 spread and it is in my opinion the best grease money can buy. However, my current method of cleaning doesn't remove it from the parts, so that's why I have decided to use the 9501 instead. I believe I read somewhere that Molykote DX too is difficult to clean off. Thinking about it, I'm pretty sure my 9501 grease which expired in June 2022 is runnier now than it was when it was new, but whether new or old it always needs to be stirred before use. So, that's why I treat the parts of the keyless works, cannon pinion, etc. with epilame. That was very thoughtful of you and something that had completely passed me by. Not sure what the epilame will do when it wears off in a non-oiled hole. Anyone?
×
×
  • Create New...