I'm a seller of this watch. My eBay ID is sound_of_time. This statement is a total bull****. [obscenity removed by moderator] The watch I sold is an authentic Heuer from 1940's, fully restored to it's original specifications.

Welcome to our forum. Your original message was delayed in appearing here, as you used a "Naughty Word", and it got held in our filter. So it was not the moderators conspiring to block your message, but the delay resulted from your use of a "Naughty Word". So the delay was your fault, not mine.

Now, let's get to the watch itself.

You state that the movement is a Valjoux 72. Based on the serial number, and what I can see, I believe that the movement is an early Valjoux 72. This likely places it in the early-to-mid 1940's.

I have all the pictures of this watch before the restoration, so there is no doubts about its originality.

Please feel free to post those photos here, or send them to me.

The Autograph dial has a different size and that model from 1960's is 3 times more expensive than my chronograph, so what was the point to put it to a cheaper case, and how to fit it to the different case width?!

Abercrombie & Fitch AutoGraph was introduced around 1953, as discussed here -- http://www.onthedash.com/Guide/_Chronographs/53.Abercrombie_&_Fitch_Auto-Graph/ I don't understand your reference to the AutoGraph being from the 1960's. Maybe you can explain what you are saying?

I believe that the AutoGraphs used a derivative of the Valjoux 72 movement, as described and shown here -- http://www.farfo.com/menswatches/Page1/abercrombie-fitch_autograph_vintage_heuer_chronograph.html So I don't understand your statement that the Autograph dial has a different size. Your movement is a Valjoux 72 and the Autograph dial would be for a Valjoux 72. Maybe you can clarify for us??

Fantasing about the marriage of the Autograph dial and older Heuer movement he forgot about the case, that is authentic Heuer as well. Too many marriages to explain in your fantasy though. Take a look to my feedback, I don't sell fakes and never cheated customers. Alex

Maybe you are missing my main question about the watch, and that relates to this dial. In my humble opinion, this is an awful looking refinished dial . . . it appears to be very crudely done. I sent you a message through EBay, asking whether the dial had been refinished, and you replied that you believed it to be original. Well, then . . . you believe that it is original and I beleive that it has been refinished. Maybe we can have someone inspect it, so that we can determine who is correct?

In addition, the hands on this watch do not appear to be correct. The main time-of-day hands are too long, and the chronograph second hand is too short . . . look where they fall on the dial tracks. In my experience, Heuer did not use this style of hands in the early to mid 1940's, but only began to use these hands at least 10 years later. This supports my opinion that this watch has been assembled from some variety of watches . . . maybe movement from the mid-1940's and dial and hands from the mid-1950s?

Please feel free to post your reply here, but please do not use any obscenities this time. I will be out of town for a few days, and will not be able to clear your message, from the "Naughty Words" filter. So if you want your message to show up on the forum, you will need to keep it clean.

Jeff

: [message edited by moderator -- 08/06/09]