Hello Colin,

Thank you very much for your reply.

Please do not get this wrong, I do not want to sound harsh.

But if the concensous means, that 3 members on here say that it is not possible that this watch in this configuration is legit, and the only evidence they provide me is:

1. an imaginery „gap“ between the dial and tachymetre bezel

and

2. that only the 13 1 casebacks are legit because I have only found 4 examples of the one with the other caseback and the 13/1 markings.

This leaves me a bit speachless.

I think finding 4 examples in the exact same configuration can not be called a coincidence.

Should I try to find even more of them?

I try to do my best.

The watch came from a family member who bought it in the early eighties at a well known jeweller.

He never had anything more done on it, than the crown repairs I mentioned in one of my others posts.

After receiving it I became curious about the caseback inscriptions and during my research I found 3 more watches in the same configuration (look at the pictures I provided).

This I found interesting.

I made, and this should especially be appreciated by the community, an interesting observation on a Heuer reference on which there is not many information available in the first place.

The forum is here to educate and inform and even sometimes to find out something new.

And for this, I hope the discussion has not ended, before it even started.

Again, what about these questions I asked, what is the response to these questions?:

--

- would it not be much much easier to take one of the many readily avalible 13 1 cases from a low budget brand?

--

- why should someone go to the trouble and create something that looks totally different from the well known execution?

--

- why are there 4 watches around the world (Australia, Germany, Sweden) with a 13/1 on the caseback who look exactly the same?

--

When I look at the dial print, the writings on the caseback, all this look much better than most of the Heuer watches with the 13 1 caseback.

Which could make me wonder (which I do not want to) how many of these so called „original“ Ref. 13-1 are actually original.

Please let´s get to a much more focused disussion with facts and not only with gut-feeling and „it doesn´t look right“ answers.

Let´s try to find some answers to the questions I asked above.

Looking forward to get the discussion going.

Thank you all very much for your help.

Hermann