# Raketa



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

I need some opinions from those of you with Russian knowledge. I like this but got only this picture. It is described as 1957 made to celebrate Yuri Gagarinâ€™s orbit in Sputnik.

Do you think itâ€™s kosher or not?

Cheers Scott.


----------



## martinzx (Aug 29, 2010)

Well it's a Soviet for sure, looks like a early 1990s or late 1980s to me. But I am on my mobile, will check it out later on my pc....

Cheers Martin


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Thanks Martin. :thumbup:


----------



## Kutusov (Apr 19, 2010)

My opinion but a more or less informed one... It looks like a kosher Raketa, although I don't think I remember ever seeing that dial. Not that it matters as there are many, at some point they were made semi-under-the-counter. BUT the bit about the 1957 and Gagarin is surely ********.

They are good watches, go for it if you like it and if it costs, say, up to US$50 new. If there's a premium about the Gagarin thing, steer away!


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

Thanks for that itâ€™s about Â£35 delivered so small potatoes as the Americans say.

I am not happy about the Yuri Gagarin tale. I think this often happens when selling a watch. WW2, Falklandâ€™s, Gulf etc.

Cheers, I might have to buy it.


----------



## chris.ph (Dec 29, 2011)

since when did gagarin fly in sputnik, i thought it was a satellite not a space capsule, but a pretty looking face tho :thumbup:


----------



## Kutusov (Apr 19, 2010)

chris.ph said:


> since when did gagarin fly in sputnik, i thought it was a satellite not a space capsule, but a pretty looking face tho :thumbup:


Well spotted, I had just focused on the general period... but Sputnik was in 1957 and Gagarin orbited the Earth inside a Vostok capsule in 1961.


----------



## martinzx (Aug 29, 2010)

Hi Scott,

It is an early 1990's watch, 1992 I would guess with a 2609 HA calibre, the description sounds like mince to me .....................

If you have not pulled the trigger do not bother...

just my opinion though 

Cheers Martin


----------



## mel (Dec 6, 2006)

Haven't seen that dial before, but that's not to say it never happened - obviously! OTOH, could it be made in 1987 to celebrate 25 year anniversary? or thereabouts! 

:weed:


----------



## martinzx (Aug 29, 2010)

mel said:


> Haven't seen that dial before, but that's not to say it never happened - obviously! OTOH, could it be made in 1987 to celebrate 25 year anniversary? or thereabouts!
> 
> :weed:


If it was an anniversary watch, I think it would state it on the dial........


----------



## Kutusov (Apr 19, 2010)

martinzx said:


> just my opinion though
> 
> Cheers Martin


I agree, there are much nicer ones like these two I used to own 



















...well, don't know about that last one


----------



## Kutusov (Apr 19, 2010)

Item 111136365586. Much better description if you ask me...


----------



## Draygo (Mar 18, 2010)

Kutusov said:


> Item 111136365586. Much better description if you ask me...


"No fungus" either. Bonus!


----------



## martinzx (Aug 29, 2010)

Draygo said:


> Kutusov said:
> 
> 
> > Item 111136365586. Much better description if you ask me...
> ...


 :lol: :lol:


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

martinzx said:


> Draygo said:
> 
> 
> > Kutusov said:
> ...


Well I did ask. How did Kutusov find that? :taz: I am disappointed and happy at the same time. :taz: Under the circumstances and to avoid further ridicule I will give it a miss. :taz:

Cheers.


----------



## chris.ph (Dec 29, 2011)

have a look at this scott

111107302605


----------



## Davey P (Sep 9, 2010)

*"Under the circumstances and to avoid further ridicule I will give it a miss"*

Brilliant! :lol:


----------



## Kutusov (Apr 19, 2010)

luckywatch said:


> Under the circumstances and to avoid further ridicule I will give it a miss. :taz:
> 
> Cheers.


No ridicule at all! I think me and Martin and Dave all started mainly on this forum and with such watches (Dave maybe not so much). The "new USSR watch" is filled with such questions. :yes:


----------



## Draygo (Mar 18, 2010)

Kutusov said:


> luckywatch said:
> 
> 
> > Under the circumstances and to avoid further ridicule I will give it a miss. :taz:
> ...


Yep, me too.

I was just amused by the seemingly unnecessary promise made by the seller of the second example. Let's face it, we've all bought watches that turn up looking like they've been dug up from somewhere damp. To me 'no fungus' really should be taken as read


----------



## martinzx (Aug 29, 2010)

Kutusov said:


> luckywatch said:
> 
> 
> > Under the circumstances and to avoid further ridicule I will give it a miss. :taz:
> ...


Indeed!



Draygo said:


> Kutusov said:
> 
> 
> > luckywatch said:
> ...


To true, I had some watches arrived covered in the said green.......FUNGUS........lol.....but not for a looong time.....


----------



## Kutusov (Apr 19, 2010)

I once got one that had a thick crust of green stuff inside the lugs. It was really :bad: . So I got a pair of latex gloves and a damp cloth and the thing started to smell like perfume! Turns out the green stuff was actually soap... still disgusting, mind...


----------



## luckywatch (Feb 2, 2013)

chris.ph said:


> have a look at this scott
> 
> 111107302605


Well thatâ€™s nice as well but it was 1957 that attracted me. I love 50â€™S 60â€™S stuff but that one I found is obviously a false description.

Cheers.


----------

