All stainless bezel & back. Lumed hands & hour dot minute markers -still absorbs light & lasts about 5 minutes. Movement and back both stamped M3 (too small on movement to photograph-placement on plate above and near stem. *** Upon further ads research, I have determined this is a Regatta 23... although, NOT a Regatta 23 "A", "C" or "G". ***
I agree, but wanted to find out what some may know off the top of their heads (experience) vs taking the time to research further myself. I had looked, and the case shapes and text are an exact match to the Regatta 23 ad and I didn't see any other similar 23J cases which had this shape named as other models. ...but thought I'd ask. It looks like all variant's in ad database had exact same case shape/details.
The reason I asked is it had two stars before I gave it three star rating....and now is still short of three stars. Maybe they are the "old star" rating based on what ever this was (unknown? Bulova 23) before it was changed by record owner to the Regatta 23, and those stars are not representative of the current ID listing.
I wonder if it would be appropriate (and easily feasible) for admin to set it up for the stars to be reset to zero when the major model ID name is changed/updated, as this would eliminate the association with the old incorrect star count. when record/watch owner changes this top level ID name, record already appears in the queue of recent comments and new/updated watches so folks would see that there's been a major change and have a opportunity to assign new correct stars when this change occurs.
This begs the question: "Would a zero star rating across the board be better than an incorrect star rating? I think it would IMO.
