Hi Gents. I know nothing about the Models , Refs , Production , Pushers replaced , Etc etc ... But I do know I do like this M IV model. Can anyone take a quick look at the pics and pass on any info ... strap is not original. Also ( In US dollars , what are we looking at. Top price) ... Or JOG ON

 

Silence is golden as my Mother once said. See you at the finish line .

Hex

 

Looks authentic to me in decent condition. For reference of course you can check Chuck chronomaddox.
The case has been polished. Other than that other looks fine. I've seen this reference sold from USD 1500 to USD 2000 depending on the condition in the past year.
Its movement is controversial: some love it , some hate it. Usually because the plastic parts inside it.
Oh....and people called this reference Mark 4.5 (caliber 1045 without Mark script in dial) compare to the real Mark 4 (with script in dial and Cal 1040).

 

Your info made me think twice. It went cheapish. But not sure about the plastic parts in movement. And it need a service + not original strap.

Thank you Private

 

Al, Archer has posted some interesting comments on this movement, in the past. It would be worth searching for those if you are considering buying one.

 

why would someone hate a particular movement because it has plastic parts?
I've never heard of anyone hating the 861/1861 movement because of the plastic part.

 

There is a big difference between a Delrin blocking lever and a hard plastic plate that becomes brittle with age

 

thank you for clarifying that.

 

It is also because the plastic part is huge (take 25 % of the visual space) and ugly (grey cheap looking plastic). I own a speedy mark 4.5 just the sake of completing my collection. But that's it. I will not add any of this movement more. For me definition of good movement is also involving visual beauty of the movement.

 

The 1045 is no doubt a utilitarian movement from a visual perspective. While it is no doubt boring to look at, I doubt you'll be spending much time doing that anyway.

On the other hand, the 1045 is a fantastic movement on the dial side. A much easier to read chronograph vs. the 321/861/1861, day/date, hacking seconds, and that 24 hour indicator (still not sure what the benefit of that is, but it's neat). While I suppose it doesn't pass muster as a "luxury" movement, these were supposed to be tool watches, and an ugly movement that performs well seems to fit that bill, no?

 

I could understand your argument, it is just my "Connie" side still could not really accepting that fact.

 

Hi Hexicon,

Like you I am also recently finding myself drawn to this model although I'm not really into chrono's I do find myself spending a lot of time looking at these recently and whilst they seem to priced lower then many of the other speedmaster options a lot of them seem to be over polished or in only fair condition so have just not pulled the trigger on one yet. Interesting to read about the movement as that may well be another factor to consider before making a purchase.

Marc

 

Hi Marc

Yes indeed , price & condition. This actually went for 900.00 euros. But I held back. It was not the original strap & would for sure need a service. The amount of models in this area is a bit daunting for me. So I will do some more listening & research. And find the right one , in good order at the right price.

Keith

 

I worked for an Omega AD for 9 years and we dreaded a 1045 coming in. There seems to be quite a bit of love for this movement which I really can't understand. This was a cheap movement that was produced to combat the quartz crisis. Amusingly, the Omega quartz movements were much better made at the time. When a 1045 goes wrong, it really goes wrong and is a real devil to get working well. The plastic bits were the first to fail. The 1040 was such a fine piece, it came as a shock when we were introduced to the 1045. The construction is simple, in a Seiko way. The cost effectiveness of repair was limited and we often replaced the whole unit, in a similar way to the DD module is on the ETA base. I am sure there are plenty of dumped Speedies out there with this movement. Many watch makers won't touch them. When they work they are effective However, you should be aware that you have a budget movement within your expensive watch and many may find that difficult to understand.

 

Does cal 861 one have a plastic in it like cal 1861?

 

Yes and no...it depends on how old it is...

But in the 861 or 1861, the plastic brake can be replaced with the 2 parts that make up the steel brake.

Cheers, Al

 

Chuck swore by this watch/movement combination - if it was good enough for Chuck, it should be good enough for most/all of us.

I bought one 5 yrs ago and it hasnt missed a beat in all that time - i still love it, its a much under appreciated watch, the Mk 4.5, and therefor still undervalued in my book

But people swoon themelves silly over the moonwatch, and thats where the majority put their cash - especially on this forum it seems

So each to their own, and the world is much the better for it

However, if you are thinking of buying one, please try it on first, is my only advice - its very thick (15 mm from memory)

cheers, paul

 

I like the mark 4.5, I like the movement.. omega 1045 aka lemania 5100. It was used in lots of military issued watches. Despite 'plastic', it's quite robust and durable and accurate. I know some watchmakers don't like it, but I do.

If you want the best of both worlds, you should look for a (Chuck Maddox) Holy Grail, ref# 376.0822. It has the same movement, with all the great attributes described above, but in a moon watch cause.

I (f'ing) love this watch.

 

Speaking as a watchmaker, it's not that I don't like this movement, it's just that it presents some difficulties - not from servicing really, because it's very straightforward to service in my view. I do know some who won't touch them because the construction, with the chronograph parts being under the dial side and not easy to get to if there is a problem.

From my perspective, there are a few things about being a watchmaker I really dislike, and one of them is telling a person that their beloved watch (family piece or one that they cherish for other reasons) is not repairable because the parts needed are no longer available. You say the watch is durable, but I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. Durable in what way would be my question. If you mean the watch can be knocked around while being worn without any issues, and not include major drops to a hard surface, then I would agree. However durable to me means something quite different - it means something that lasts for a very long time, and if it needs fixing, it can be repaired.

Now really most of the plastic inside this watch (there is a lot) is not something to be concerned about, so using this 5100 as an example:



What you see here on the train side is not problematic usually. It's the dial side that bothers me more:



And specifically the support for the date indicator mechanism:



Unlike metal, as plastic ages, it becomes more brittle. This plastic is no exception, and if this piece cracks from a drop of the watch, or cracks when the watch is being worked on, you should know that it is no longer available from Omega. I believe this is a fairly recent development as I recall looking it up maybe 2 years ago and they still listed it with a price, but now it says it's NLA.

So you could get a donor movement yes, but the plastic in that is going to be from the same general era. So unlike a movement that has nothing but metal parts in it, say like the 100+ year old Waltham pocket watch I have on my bench right now, getting a donor is not going to be the solution in the future for these.

I do get that people like the functionality of this watch, but specifically with this "grail" model that some like very much, I personally would hesitate to put big dollars into one when I know that there are parts inside that are discontinued, degrade over time, and are not repairable. Now someone may start making this part, and this might even be a candidate for a printed part if they get accurate enough in the near future...but it's more than just someone not liking the fact there is plastic inside because they think it's cheap. The concerns are real...

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks Al, that is a complicated looking piece of plastic.

What is the part number?