G99
13685
i've checked the book for...
i've checked the book for you and the second hand should have a flat bottom
for the date you give and although the pic isnt brilliant it looks to be the
correct one to me. the caseback isnt correct for the year, but it is correct for
the model number 145.022 which was used for many years. its a nice caseback so i
wouldnt worry about it, however, there are a lot of good original speedmasters
out there so if your not sure go for another one.
for the date you give and although the pic isnt brilliant it looks to be the
correct one to me. the caseback isnt correct for the year, but it is correct for
the model number 145.022 which was used for many years. its a nice caseback so i
wouldnt worry about it, however, there are a lot of good original speedmasters
out there so if your not sure go for another one.
if your not worried about a specific year you'll get better value by buying
a later one as all the collectors want one made when the space programme was
still in full flow.
a later one as all the collectors want one made when the space programme was
still in full flow.
hope that helps
Graham
Newbe needs help on an Omega Moon Watch
Hello, I have been looking for an used Omega and came across this 1970 unit. Can you take a look at the pictures and help me see if it looks original? The watch is advertised as an 1970 cal 861. Much appreciated. Luciano...
it all looks good to me except the caseback
i believe the 'flight qualified' caseback was first used in 1971, but i dont know when they added the 'only watch to be worn on the moon' it was later on so i would guess the caseback is a replacement. very common as people seem to want the casebacks with...
Thanks G99, one more Q'
Thanks for your response. In another blog I was told that the chrono second hand looks replaced. Do you think that is correct? Thanks Luciano
i think its correct. its...
i think its correct. its very difficult without digging out my copy of time capsule to verify when the hands changed. sadly i'm moving house so it might take a while to find. if you can post a pic of the dial with the chrono second stopped at 10 secs so i...
mmm, not sure.
I will try, but these photos are from an auction, not actually mine, but i will ask. Thanks G99
i've checked the book for...
i've checked the book for you and the second hand should have a flat bottom for the date you give and although the pic isnt brilliant it looks to be the correct one to me. the caseback isnt correct for the year, but it is correct for the model number 145....
further to my last statement
i've just checked the Omega site set up by the late Chuck Maddox, the reknowned world expert in Speedmasters, and what he states in one small section is that your caseback is the second generation of 'flight qualified' casebacks with the added 'first watc...
Thanks Graham, one more Q
Hello Graham, I really appreciate the level of detail and dedication to this post, for that I thank you sincerely. I have asked the owner for the movement # and I am waiting for his response. In the meantime I found another seller with the same model, I w...
this one looks perfectly ok...
this one looks perfectly ok to me, the 30mil serial number lasts from 1970 through 1971 so a mid to late 30mil fits nicely with 71. nice condition with just a bit of lume lost in the centre second hand, but its 40 years old and you need to expect some deg...
it looks like it is...
it looks like it is plastic to me, but the pics arent very big. how many owners have had plastic parts changed for earlier metal parts ? its not something i would be concerned over myself. G
THANK YOU, thank you!
Hello Graham, I really appreciate the level of detail and dedication, I will go look at the watch (the second watch with the old bracelet) personally and decide. If I move foward with it, i will definitely post some better pictures for all of you. Thanks ...
32mil to put it in 1972, but there has to be some give and take
all the serial number listings always say +/- 2 years (to cover everyones backsides ) the likelihood is that the seller has got the date wrong and its a perfectly good 1972 Speedy. you've now got 2 good examples, but i think the 2nd example is a better be...