aroma
521
It looks like both are suspect........
The hands on the first (168.017) are wrong and the other is something I've never seen (suspect a redial). Here is my 168.017 together with a Dauphine-handed 167.005. I've never seen Dauphine hands on a 168.017 but there again, I'm not an expert (learning fast though).
Cheers
Andrew
Opinions sought please
Dear Omega vintage purists , I posted a thread last week Omega Constellation C 's but unfortunately provided no photos. I managed to arrange for seller to let me photograph the watches including the movements and case backs. The photos were taken indoors ...
Having problems with mac basic uploader
Had 3 tries. Will attempt to post later.thnks for your patience. cheers,dreamer
constellation C , Steel
please comment on dial, dauphine hands etc. steel connie C. ST 168.017 steel connie C. ST 168.017 non QS 561 movement another view of 561 non QS back case showing ST 168.017 engraving another view of pristine gleaming gilt...
Constellation C gold capped
with brown, rusty coloured dial with stick baton hands.Dial has fine spider web crazing which pictures do not show well.Comes with 564 QS movement. gold capped Constellation CD 168 017 SP with enamel type dial dial has fine spider web crazing 564 QS movem...
The colorful redial...
..which is why I'm sure it's cracking. Movement is from 1968 as you say and does look clean according to photos. All depends on the price and what you are looking for.
Thanks Mrsnak
When you say its a redial, do you mean a genuine omega dial from another reference ? Yes, all the information on the net strongly suggests the dauphine hands are not for the C ( never meant to by Gerald Genta ).I have also PM you . Cheers,dreamer
I've never seen an Omega dial like this...
...but other watch brands (like Bulova for the same era) have done this style. This is not the way it left the factory. This message has been edited by mrsnak on 2011-09-11 07:50:15
problematic
As Snak said, wrong hands on the ST, also the date window does not look right, however it could be the photo detail. Could use sharper pictures.
Thank You
Other than your date window query, is the dial okay ? Thanks. Cheers,dreamer
I'm going with wrong hands...
...on the ss. Rest looks okay. This message has been edited by mrsnak on 2011-09-10 16:50:29
It looks like both are suspect........
The hands on the first (168.017) are wrong and the other is something I've never seen (suspect a redial). Here is my 168.017 together with a Dauphine-handed 167.005. I've never seen Dauphine hands on a 168.017 but there again, I'm not an expert (learning ...
Dreamer asked me to take a photo from a page of Journey Through Time.
And this is it. I hope it will contribute to the topic being discussed. I am a true novice when it comes to vintage watches so I will refrain from making any observation. But I do notice that the second from last number on the reference are not consistent...
Ooopps. Sorry about the double image. Something was wrong with my server.
And I forgot to remove the first attempt at embedding the pic so there go two of them. Ruckdee
Thanks Ruckdee for image
I am a novice with vintage omegas , but am attracted to the constellation C's after reading and viewing photos here so I am on the hunt for a Constellation C and I saw the 2 offered for sale which I have taken pictures asking for comment. I have read the ...
I have seen..
4-5 "brown" dialed Constellation "C" on auctions in Sweeden and Denmark. Best Thomas
Thanks for finding this...
Nice to have it confirmed as genuine Omega. The great thing about this hobby is that all of us are expanding our knowledge and sharing what we know.
Trust me it is this learning spirit and gentle ambiance that make...
...this forum the place to be. Ruckdee