I would like to share Abel's view on this. As many of us, I am intrigued by the look of these Transitionals with their shiny finish and the fat hands. But I wonder if this fascination is more related to their scarcity (Jeff, you must remember the scarcity/value issue), to their "transitionalness" and to their undefined history. I believe all this has something to do with the relationship between the significance of a prototype model versus its final version, still to be explored at many levels.

It would be interested to ask ourselves which version we would lean to if both versions were equally available on the market and at similar price (and with no extra historical baggage!). Would we go for the crispy dial of the transitional, but with slightly out of proportion hands (oooppsss...)? Or would we lean toward the final version, with more balanced proportions between dial, hands, colors, etc. but overall a bit flatter than the Transitionals (oppss...again!)?...just another question to increase the Heuer's 'asymptotic' knowledge curve....

Cheers
Francesco (owner of a final version 1133B!)

Well, if something is 100% certain...that's there's a lot of
: uncertainty regarding Heuer serial numbers and their
: "what's on the shelf"-policy.

: These Transitional M's are working on a great comeback for sure...I
: even start to like the blue metallic dial if I see these
: wonderful pictures from Ralf, David, Rich, Peter and Jeff...

: Those square polished hands are so convincing! I really like those.

: But personally I still do prefer this blue finish;
:
:

: Cheers,
: Abel.