WatchProSite|Market|Digest
WatchProSite|Market|Digest

Omega

19 Comments view entire thread 
Comments:

Mystery dial on Omega Seamaster "Cross of Merit" 1956 ref. OT 2850

 
 By: HSTE : November 19th, 2014-04:58

 I would like to take up a thread that started and also ended in November 2008 in this forum. The thread was obviously related to the Omega Seamaster "Cross of Merit" and it ended with two pictures of the watch that I now own since about two years (at least: I suspect that it was the one I now own as it had the same "strange" dial). The thread ended with the question: "is it a fake"?

I purchased this watch because I got it for a very reasonable price and because I actually like this particular dial more than the "official" ones as I think this is less "gothic", more clean and lean. An un-typical purchase for me as I normally only go for up-front visible- fully detailed and undisputed authenticity.

The experts will know the (few) variations of dials that came with the OT 2850. Given the special dial of mine I did some further exploration including having my watch-maker to remove the dial so that I could take some pictures. So, by now I can share the following facts:

  • Omega extract of archives confirms a match of the cal 471 movement number belonging to the case number of this watch. Production date is stated to be June 11, 1956. Interestingly it confirms to be the Cross of Merit commemorative watch, but under the item "dial" it says: "not mentioned"
  • The dial is made by Z.J. Fluckiger, one of the specialist dial makers used by Omega at the time.

 If you look at the close up pictures of the dial, it is clear that this is not one of those "Thai-versions" nor the "index-markers-glued-onto-the-dial" type of stuff: the Cross of Merit emblem stands 3D-like out of the dial, it is very detailed and very precise. But then we all seem to know that Omega started to use the baton/onyx type of dials at the earliest at around 1958.

So, the big question is of course: fake (I guess not), prototype (?), custom made upon request as later replacement (must have been expensive?), other? Food for thought. Whatever the outcome, I really like this watch with this particular dial. But I am very curious to hear your comments, theories and feed-backs.

Cheers 

 





















This message has been edited by HSTE on 2014-11-19 05:09:43

I don't believe the crown is either correct . . .

 
 By: Dr No : November 20th, 2014-13:58
. . . or original to the watch, and the same goes for the hands, too.  

There's at least one current third party dial maker that refinishes XVI dials.  My sense is the dial of this one came from another watch, and was refinished to fit an original SM XVI case and movement. 

Perhaps one of the established experts will come forward to assist.

Cordially,

Art

We may never know....

 
 By: mondodec : November 21st, 2014-04:39
But, as you say it is from a known Omega dial maker, although the XVI dials do not have the multiple ZJ embossing on the reverse, and my feeling is that it is not refinished. There are variations of XVI dials including a solid gold version, but this is the first one I have seen with these markers.  They are properly riveted and no glue is evident, suggesting an original dial.

As with any model - even limited editions - an inventory of parts is produced to service the watch.  One possibility is that it is indeed a service replacement dial.  Another possibility is that it is a reject from the dial maker that has somehow made its way out of the reject box.  

It is recorded that a former prototype maker for Omega, John-Pierre Mathey-Claudet, was the person commissioned to produce the dials for the Cross of Merit, but he would have been supplied with blanks upon which to produce the coloured design. The dial maker made the dial blanks with the reverse embossed Olympic Cross motif. Then the Chinese/Japanese lacquering process would be undertaken by Mathey-Claudette. The layers of dial ground would be built up layer by layer, and that's possibly a clue, because I'm not sure your dial is Chinese lacquer. After the lacquer build-up, M-C would  render the outlines of the motif in gold.  The last part of the process would be the produce either the multi-coloured or red Olympic rings.  The possible clue is that if the dial is not Chinese lacquer, then it may never have reached M-C and that leads me to the following. 

Gerald Genta told me some years ago when I put some questions to him about his time at Omega in the later Fifties and early Sixties that until the late 1950s watch case and dial design was a fairly laissez faire process, with suppliers providing a range of examples made up to reflect their current ideas and Omega's head of the Design Depart, Pierre Moinat, and other executives making a choice from available designs. So it is conceivable that your dial could be one of several examples produced for approval but rejected.  So it could be one of the 'mock ups' or samples produced before the choice was made to go for the dial with the coffin markers. 

 But how it got into your watch I think will remain a mystery.  About ten years ago, a Swiss merchant was selling real, but imperfect Omega dials for Constellations and other models. Some had damaged or missing dial feet and others had other, sometimes almost imperceptible, flaws.  I remember emailing him and asking how he came to have these dials and he refused to answer.  I suspect they may have found their way out the back door of either Omega or a defunct dial maker. So, your dial may have come from a similar source.

We'd need to see bigger pics of the dial to ascertain whether the dial is indeed painted and not lacquered, but the chafe marks at six o'clock seem to show a thin painted layer and not a thicker Chinese lacquering process.  But it's worth investigating, if only to feed Erich's and my curiosity smile    I think that out of all the possible explanations the idea that this was a sample is the most plausible, even though it may never been proved.

Regards

Desmond  


That seems the most likely explanation, Desmond. One could imagine . . .

 
 By: Dr No : November 21st, 2014-09:49
. . . a XVI sent in for service way back when with a cracked dial.  After rummaging around the parts bin and finding none of the correct dials available, they might well have tapped a reject or prototype instead.

Most cordially,

Art

More pics, not sure they help...

 
 By: HSTE : November 22nd, 2014-01:30

Thank you Desmond for sharing your wealth of knowledge, your thoughts are very very interesting. I tried to take some makros from the original size pictures, not sure this helps as to the question of lacquer or paint.

Best regards, HSTE


















Yes,

 
 By: mondodec : November 22nd, 2014-05:14
my feeling is that this is a painted dial. Not being able to see it under a loupe, I still think it's thinner than lacquered dials I've seen.

So service replacement or sample are the two best options I can come up with. It certainly does look a fine piece with those markers.

Cheers

Desmond

Omega Olympic

 
 By: maxbliss888 : January 23rd, 2015-07:45

It toke me much efforts to find these two versions of the Omega. Hope it could shield some lights in the discussion.

Omega

 
 By: maxbliss888 : January 23rd, 2015-07:50

At the back of each watches, there were name engraved of the receipents..

I don´t want to rain on the parade, but...

 
 By: mac_omega : January 23rd, 2015-22:14

Hi Max,

I don´t want to rain on the parade, but (as far as can be judged by the small picture) the right watch in your photo does not have a dial in original condition - it is an obvious re-dial.

Omega olympic watch

 
 By: maxbliss888 : January 24th, 2015-07:07
I wouldn't mind your rain as I feel happy with the watch as it was a gift...

Questionable Omega

 
 By: maxbliss888 : January 23rd, 2015-08:07
These are questionable dials 

Photo from Omega

 
 By: maxbliss888 : January 23rd, 2015-08:51
Photo from Omega 




Baton dial xvi. another one.

 
 By: michael e : April 8th, 2017-03:01
A bit of a thread resurrection here.
 For future reference, just in case someone else has one of these watches with this dial.
I have only seen a few of these dials in many years of collecting.
Here is another one.
Thanks Michael
























Wow, this is brilliant Michael. It is exactly the same that I have on my Melbourne. Exactly!! Just different hands.

 
 By: HSTE : April 8th, 2017-03:09
Thanks for posting, this is very interesting.
Cheers, HSTE

What a beautiful piece and great dial :) , going from the initial post by HSTE and now your piece, I tend to think that they are some type of prototype dial. With no further info. Archive wise, I guess we are open to speculation [nt]

 
 By: Rogi : April 8th, 2017-05:43
Although I tend to speculate for prototype, they were certainly built in smaller quantaties. Heres an old shot of my Pink Gold XVI (probably replacement dial, but comfirmed Omega dial by my watchmaker) but it has an interesting delivery location and date from the extract biggrin that I hope to share after the contest is over hehe.





Here's an old image from my files . . .

 
 By: Dr No : April 10th, 2017-23:34
. . . of an original (save the crown) pink gold XVI.



[my wrist, JI's Ω, davudvl's photo ca '05]

Note the hands; I don't recall seeing pink gold originals for sale recently, but they would be worth searching for.

Art


JI's is the perfect combo, all original, but I couldn't bear wearing that piece if I ever found it :D I was searching for the "Automatic" script version for a while now.

 
 By: Rogi : April 11th, 2017-06:41
JI's is a beautiful example of the first dial (of the non-Olympic cross versions) that is more common and the crown missing, well it happens smile they live rough lives but it is beautiful in what some would call "imperfection' it gives the piece character.
I havn't seen an all "original" piece with box, papers etc in a long time, let alone a Pink Gold version, the Porcelain in those dial batches was very fragile (bad formula/forming process perhaps), so I could see how easily it is to damage or chip over time.  When my piece rolled around with original box as well (Olympic Cross on top) I had to add it biggrin It is wonderfully wearable, but now I can't wear it as the "Master of your own Domain" contest is still to be won biggrin lol


My piece does have a replacement dial and wrong hands but considering where it was shipped too and the turbulent environment/era of the time period I could see how one could get damaged easily, plus the "Automatic" Script and no Seamaster font was the cherry on top for me, it Is as original as I would ever want it, or else it would be shelved as a "safe queen" lol That would be blasphemy for me if I ever had a piece that was a Safe Queen
(The Automatic Dials were sold it appears at late 56 into 57, we can confirm this by the multiple adverts listing the "Automatic" script XVI models added with the Seamaster script). A good example from 1957, a Spanish advert with the "Automatic" script dial:
 








Small P.S. You're a good luck symbol Dr No the same day I posted my previous response and I've spotted a "twin" set of Pink Gold Omega XVI with box and papers

 
 By: Rogi : April 11th, 2017-12:53
At a famous auction house biggrin

There was a full set pink gold XVI on eBay a few years back . . .

 
 By: Dr No : April 11th, 2017-13:56
. . . that went for ~ $4K US.  I wonder what level this one is going to reach.

Art

Agreed but who knows anything is possibel, the other pieces in the auction are impressive as well. I'm glad I got my piece when I did and from a good friend :) [nt]

 
 By: Rogi : April 11th, 2017-14:17
No message body