Seiko & Citizen Watch Forum Message Archive
Does it have the little Seiko squigle between the 150 and the 6 marker?
I've noticed that some of the 6309-7049's have the little Seiko squigle between the 150 and the top of the 6 marker. Mine is a "5" and I know it's an 85 because I bought it in January of 86 and it doesn't have a squigle. I've always wondered if the stopped putting the squigles on the dial at a certain point, or if some from a different factory had them, or what? I think most of the 6105 pics I've seen have the squigle on the dial in the same place and my late 60's and early 70's Seiko non-divers all have the squigle on them.
Anyone know what dates the squigles were left off?
MarkO
Message Thread
- Just got my first Seiko diver :-) - Chris Moy - 2003-03-05 09:23:00
- You are correct! Sept. of 1987. I love my 6309s....../nt - Mitchy the Kid - 2003-03-05 09:35:00
- There ya go! We only need one person to confirm it... - Flo - 2003-03-05 09:40:00
- The Seiko Diver's Reference lists the production starting in.........>>>>>>>> - Mitchy the Kid - 2003-03-05 09:50:00
- The '77 / '87 dilemma. (more) - Tom ===Q=== - 2003-03-05 19:55:00
- Whoops, didn'trealize Randy said the exact thing below. Great minds think alike! ;) (nt) - Tom ===Q=== - 2003-03-05 19:58:00
- Thanks!..Mine says: JAPAN 6309 - 704L T. So that makes '77!! - Flo - 2003-03-06 04:06:00
- Nice job! But... - Flo - 2003-03-05 09:38:00
- this has come up before.... - shawn - 2003-03-05 10:11:00
- So, even though it came up before, we still don't know ;) - Flo - 2003-03-05 11:09:00
- you are correct sir! we only know what we know..... - shawn - 2003-03-05 16:35:00
- A case with a "7" and the designation of "Japan" on dial and case back>>g - Randy M. - 2003-03-05 16:10:00
- Good for you Chris-looking forward to your pics. nt - Scott Gearhart - 2003-03-05 13:02:00
- Thanks guys! nt - Chris Moy - 2003-03-05 14:36:00
- Does it have the little Seiko squigle between the 150 and the 6 marker? - MarkO - 2003-03-06 05:43:00
- Mine doesn't have the squigle mark. You guys are probably right, 87 sounds right. Thanks - Chris Moy - 2003-03-06 07:37:00