[PsychoSoAnt]

So, full disclosure, my wife is the amazing one who actually found this treasure purely by accident, but we're both equally pleased with it! As we were sorting through a lot of around 110 watches I came upon this one and immediately knew that it was the real deal. After checking all of the marks on it and doing a little research, it turns out we have a Must de Cartier, c. 1980s, mechanical, G.P. Vermeil. Still runs splendidly, still has the original jewel on the crown, and the original band with the signed clasp on it. I'm not sure if Cartier has anything special on the movement that I should be looking for, so that will require quite a bit more research on my part. I'm thinking we will try to get a new crystal for this beauty (as there is a scratch right down the middle) and a nice re-plating to finish it off. What a nice surprise at the end of the day, huh?

 

[ulackfocus]

Um, I'd be a little suspicious of that. Most Cartier watches say "20 m PLAQUE" on the back, meaning gold plated with a 20 micron layer. I could be wrong (and that's a 50/50 shot with Cartier) but any I've ever seen that say "18K GOLD ELECTROPLATE" were fakes. Is there somewhere you can have it authenticated? If it is real that's a nice find.

 

[ivan1998]

IMHO the movement don't look right. It should have Cartier written some where on the movement and some numbers I hope I'm wrong. Here a pic from a Must de catier from the 80's

 

[aj727b]

Other differences too... doesn't mean it IS fake but...

Look at the shock protection on the known must de Cartier movement example: clearly it appears to be an incabloc type shock spring mount for the balance wheel jewel... On the unknown possible Cartier it appears to have no shock protection (to my novice eyes). Am I missing something or is that about right?:confused1: (And I could DEFINITELY be missing something...) Hope it is the McCoy that you have. I know that in the real world things do not ALWAYS look exactly like the picture...

 

[CometHunter]

Someone tried to stamp "SUISSE" on the plate (to the left of the stem)
Heavy S, medium U, faint I, and forget about the S-S-E...not that there is enough room for it!!! I'm not thinking Cartier is that careless.

 

[PsychoSoAnt]

Hmmmm...looks like I may need to do some more digging. I appreciate everyone jumping in. I'm still fairly new to this, so any and all advice is certainly appreciated. So it would appear that the movement is the most suspect thing. I'll certainly do some digging and see what I can find out.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk

 

[RobinO]

It may be the angle that the photograph was taken from but the writing seems to be off-centre and not straight. At first it seemed as though this was a great find and I sincerely hope it is. Unfortunately for you I cannot see Cartier allowing such careless workmanship to get through their quality control. Even though the Must de Cartier range is their less expensive one they will surely be aware that the only thing most people will ever look at is the Cartier name. I own a Cartier Santos and the attention to detail and finish is brilliant. A friend has a must de Cartier watch (different style unfortunately) and the quality is equally as good. Good luck with your research and don't forget to tell us what happens:thumbup:

 

[PsychoSoAnt]

Okay, so after more research I think I have a conclusion...it is close but no cigar. The writing, while straight (admittedly the picture could be better) is incomplete. The dial should say Swiss on the bottom I believe. I'm going to take it and have it looked at by a professional, but I think everyone is right about this. Oh well, we only paid a couple of bucjs for it, so no big loss if it isn't real. Thanks so much to everyone on this!

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk

 

[aj727b]

Great lesson for the price!

Okay, so after more research I think I have a conclusion...it is close but no cigar. The writing, while straight (admittedly the picture could be better) is incomplete. The dial should say Swiss on the bottom I believe. I'm going to take it and have it looked at by a professional, but I think everyone is right about this. Oh well, we only paid a couple of bucjs for it, so no big loss if it isn't real. Thanks so much to everyone on this!

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk

Worst case scenario you got a great beginning lesson in the type of clues to look for in the future. For a few bucks it was an inexpensive lesson that hopefully helps you and others here to avoid the much more costly watch collecting mistakes that can be made... just ask around for some stories about high-priced junk. Some days you get the bear, and some days the bear gets you.

 

[PsychoSoAnt]

Great points aj. We're still learning, but it's definitely fun. Right now, my wife is just getting started in her curiosity in to watches, and I'm just starting to go deeper in mine so it's fun for us to do these types of things together. There are so many things to look for and learn about, I'm certain we'll make other mistakes along the way. I genuinely appreciate everyone's generosity in sharing perspectives and knowledge though, and I'm really happy to have found such a great place, with great people, to share something I'm interested in.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk