One of my old ones for comparison....

Poor pic but shows polished side

Face for comparison

: But a remarkably good job, as far as the redials we see go. I even
: dug out a real 1553 for comparison to see where they'd slipped
: up. Let's play dissect the watch, as I noticed something about
: 1553s whilst I was doing that myself.

: Let's start with the obvious:

: - Hands. As stated before, these aren't original. In fact, not a
: single one of the five is correct. And lord knows where that
: blobby perpetual seconds hand is from.

: - Tachy ring. On a 1553, these should be the later type with
: "Tachy" at 1 o'clock and should always contrast with
: the dial (so silver with blue and vice versa).

: - Dial colour. This should be a deep blue, which may appear
: brighter in certain light or may have turned violet with
: exposure to light. This dial looks black in the photographs.

: - Register. Looks the right colour, but the "extension"
: where it says "Carrera" seems to have a serrated edge
: on the photos, whereas this should be a sharp straight line.

: - Heuer shield. Done well, but a peculiarity of the 1553 is just
: how much of the shield the Heuer wording fills up - the margin
: around the wording is very fine, whereas this watch looks more
: like the Heuer shield does on an 1153, for example.

: - Lume. No lume dot at 3. Classic redialler slip-up, they've seen
: that the markers need reluming but presumably without an
: original 1553 for reference haven't realised that there should
: be a lume dot at 3 o'clock as well.

: - Date window. Now here's the one where I found something out. My
: 1553s have sharp-edged date windows, so I was prepared to flag
: this one, with its rounded corners, as incorrect too but a
: picture search showed up some more 1553s, particularly Ss, with
: rounded windows. So touch and go on this one.

: Anyone for anything else?! All in all, a put together it would
: appear, but at least it reminded me of how much I like the 1553
: and made the decision on today's watch for me :)