# Seiko 6309-7290



## Barryboy (Mar 21, 2006)

Hi... I have this 6309-7290 dated from, I think, 1984. I know that there are some really knowledgeable Seiko experts out there and would ask for some guidance as to originality. I attach photos and apologise for their quality as they were taken be me. Those of you who have seen my previous efforts will understand what that means....



















For my part I suspect that the hands might be replacements as the lume is not as faded as that on the dial. I am also uncertain about the bezel insert - I have seen these with a 'stick' number 1 in the '10' (such as on my 7002-7000) and also with a serif no.1 as on this watch.

Any guidance from the knowledgeable will be genuinely appreciated

Rob


----------



## bjohnson (Oct 2, 2007)

Bezel and hands look like replacements.

Chapter ring doesn't line up.

Everything else looks OK in these photos.

Check that crown screws down several turns.


----------



## michaelh (Oct 1, 2007)

Dial (un-origional 7002) and hands are replaced. Chapter ring is off line. Bezel insert looks replaced too, not enough wabi.


----------



## DaveS (Dec 7, 2009)

michaelh said:


> Dial (un-origional 7002) and hands are replaced. Chapter ring is off line. Bezel insert looks replaced too, not enough wabi.


Michael/Barryboy

The dial is not a 7002, it looks correct to me for a 6309-729x. The 7002 movement is date only not day date, so the 7002 dial would have to be modified to show the day.

The bezel insert is definately non-original, it should have a bigger lume dot and the "10" should not have a "tail/serif".

The hands are the correct "style" for a 6309-729x but the lume looks too white, so I think they are non-original.

As mentioned by others, the chapter ring is misaligned. It has a notch in it, into which fits a tab on the dial to keep them aligned with each other. The movement needs to be removed and the chapter ring rotated so that the dial tab fits correctly into the chapter ring.

Hope this helps.

Dave


----------

