I compared your photo to four or five different Autavias, including two of the first execution / big-register guys, and I must say that I have nothing useful to report. I tried different angles, different lighting and even different loupes, but I see nothing that resembles what seems to be happening with your dial . . . the milky areas, etc.

Also, comparing the first execution guys to a second exectuion Autavia, the finish seems to be identical . . . nothing different about the sheen, shine, etc. There may be some "sheen" in small areas on the white registers, but no real difference between the various executions.

Sorry I can't be more definitive, but it's hard to compare these guys by long distance.

Jeff

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

: What do you think of this dial? Original?

: My opinion : I think (hope) it is original...
: but, I am worried it may have been
: "treated" in some way.

: Thats why I wanted to ask the "privileged
: few", the owners of 1st exec dial
: Autavias.

: When I look at the dial in the light but at an
: acute angle, the surface of the dial looks
: like it might have been varnished. The sheen
: on the dial, the way the light is reflected
: is very different from the dial on a 2nd
: exec dial Autavia, or any of the other
: Heuers in my collection. You can't see this
: in the scan (well maybe a tiny bit in the
: subreg dials).

: Some guys told me it is due to laquer finish -
: is that correct? I find it strange that the
: dial changed finish so much between the 1st
: and 2nd exec dial. Anybody seen that?

: Any opinions or advice?

: regards
: worried of london

: PS: please no comments on the bezel. I know it
: is embarrasing. Just don't mention it, OK.