Omega

SamJH
186

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Most misunderstand Omega's use of serial numbers

Omega did not, repeat, did not assign serial numbers sequentially.

A sequence of serial numbers were assigned to a calibre for production before manufacture (not for sales and customer service as shipped).  Thus, at any point in time, Omega was producing watches from as many different sequences of serial numbers as types of calibres they were producing . 

Stated another way, for example, if Omega were only producing 561s (chronometer date), 562s (non-chronometer date), 710 (non-chronometer ultra thin) and 712 (chronometer ultra thin), there would have been Omega calibres being produced from 4 different sequences of serial numbers simultaneously.  So, for instance, if the 561/562s were very popular, they might have a sequence of serial numbers much higher than a less popular and less produced calibre.  Remember, Omega had been using the sequence of serial numbers for production purposes since the 1890s . . . .

Add to this that I understand Omega produced movements, put them is storage, and then did not use them until later.  Thus, a watch produced might not be shipped for several years.  This is particularly true for chronometers, which have the additional delay of testing before they can be used. 

Perhaps most relevant, is that the Omega serial number charts (supposedly) reflect the first use of a particular series of a million numbers.  Some versions of such charts show the most common numbers shipped during a given year, while others include the earliest use of a number as additional data.  Omega does not define what the charts are showing very well. 

So there is a 16 month time period during which movements were submitted for testing, October 1964 until February 1966.  Assume a three month delay for testing and storage before use.  Thus the first shipment date of the 24,000,000 numbered watches were unlikely to have been until 1965 or later.  The most complete serial number chart I have access to, complied by Ryan Rooney from several sources, is at  

click here

It shows the first use of 24 million numbers in 1966.  Was it possible Omega had a literal year's worth of chronometer movements in storage so there was a delay of a year from testing until use?

While not directly relevant, within the last year there was an exchange on another watch forum, supposedly confirmed by Omega.  As you may know, Omega purchased chronograph movements from Lemania, a sister company (now Manufacture Breguet).  Apparently, Omega purchased a supply of calibre 321 movements in 1959, never taking another delivery.  Please note I do not know if this is true, but no one immediately contested it. 

Omega began using the replacement calibre 861 movements when they ran out of calibre 321.  If this tale is true, then Omega stockpiled 10 years worth of calibre 321 movements from Lemania.  It suggests that a delay of one year after chronometer testing to begin using chronometer movements is not unreasonable (if the tale is true). 

 Hope this helps.

Sam

Site Info.