Tudor 9411 authentic?

[Dan95]

Greetings forumers,

Back with another Tudor 9411 with riveted bracelet. As with any 9411 on the market, the concern that it might have a jkf case, generic ETA prevails.

Appreciate everyone chiming in!











Photos of movement pending. Thanks for your input :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bonesey]

Some quite out of place details (to my non-expert eyes).

1: Bezel insert pearl is certainly aftermarket (and terrible). Possibly whole insert.
2: Crown looks too thin for a triplock. The crownguard should come about half way up the serated edges on the crown.
3: Bracelet is all wrong, too new, should probably be 7206 with 50 end links.
4: Profile of the crowngaurds is too thick at the top.

I wouldn't touch that one with a bargepole.

[Sinnlover]

Whilst it’s not the best picture, I don’t like the look of the hand set. Could you post a picture of it directly face on? The bezel insert is wrong as mentioned already.

[sweets]

Not one redeeming feature, I'm afraid. Not one.
Every detail you look at is wrong

• Caseback engraving
• Bezel insert, and bezel pip
• Crown(too shallow)
• Crown Guards, for both profile and the fact that the crown recess is too shallow
• Dial print (harder to tell from this level of detail, but certainly wrong looking in terms of being too blocky and thick-fonted)
• The fact that they have rivets on a solid link bracelet - it so bad it is not even funny
• Bezel edge
• Case looks brand new with crisp chamfers and a perfect polished side
• Lume
• Hands

I am sure tht given a few larger photos the list could go on
May I ask where it came from?
Dave

[Dan95]

Just got more photos for your perusal












Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dan95]

Am currently being offered this by a local seller who has a considerable collection of vintage tudors as below:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bonesey]

I'm not sure there's a single genuine watch in that box other than perhaps the sub < 50 quid soviet ones. Maybe the Tag chrono.

Going from left to right they all have serious issues even with the crappy photos. The only one I couldn't tell you for sure is the Air king. But even that looks like the end links don't fit the case properly. Check the seconds hand. If it's fake you will see the tube, if its genuine it will be capped. The cyclops on the LV is hilariously crap. The three tudor subs are all pretty suspect. The one on the far left (corrected right way up image) looks like it has solid end links. None of the plexi crystals has the clarity of a genuine or even a decent quality after market item.

[Sinnlover]

Sorry but that is one of the common fakes that were about a few years ago
The dial, hands and case are all wrong.
There is a website that points out the common tells and this has all of them. http://www.deskdivers.com/Site/Home.html

Whilst the picture of his collection is not the best I think a few other Tudor subs look a bit suspect to me.

[jameswrx]

I'm not sure there's a single genuine watch in that box other than perhaps the sub < 50 quid soviet ones. Maybe the Tag chrono.

Going from left to right they all have serious issues even with the crappy photos. The only one I couldn't tell you for sure is the Air king. But even that looks like the end links don't fit the case properly. Check the seconds hand. If it's fake you will see the tube, if its genuine it will be capped. The cyclops on the LV is hilariously crap. The three tudor subs are all pretty suspect. The one on the far left (corrected right way up image) looks like it has solid end links. None of the plexi crystals has the clarity of a genuine or even a decent quality after market item.

This ^

Run for the hills!

[sweets]

Yep, as above, the additional photos only confirm that the one you have been offered is all wrong, and the collection photo further confirms it by showing more examples of the same fakery.

Dave

[Chris_in_the_UK]

The 'collection' shot is all you need to see.