I own this ref. 105.002-62 from 1964 with an EoA. It is one of the late ¨batton¨ hands version (serial nr. 20.520.2xx). What I don't like is that the silver tension ring of the apparently original A1 crystal covers the "SWISS MADE" writing almost completely. I found a picture of an early 105.003-63, that was recently posted, that has a slimmer silver tension ring: I think that a narrower tension ring would look much better, what do the experts think? Thank you
I have a nos A1 crystal with a slimmer silver tension ring, but am not certain which reference Speedmaster it’s for. Someone told me they were made at the end of silver ring production, just before the (also slim) black ring was introduced. From your photos, I think the slimmer one does look better with that dial as there’s spacing between the minute marks and the ring.
Hi Ash, yes the slimmer tension ring looks much better IMHO too. Do you would eventually have such a crystal for sale? Thank you Adriano
In my experience, I have seen some "slim" silver tension rings on 105002s and on early 105.003s i.e. -63 and even -64. The larger silver ring is seen only up to 105002. Thus, your large tension ring is correct for your 105002, and the narrow one as well. But only for this specific reference. Concerning the look, I prefer the large one.
Thank you for your answer. I would like to find a slim tension ring, because I do not like the ring covering the "SWISS MADE" writing that is positioned in a very peculiar way on this dial. Do you have any idea how wide the narrower ring should be? Thank you
May I respectfully suggest that you consider keeping the wider ring? Yes, the Swiss Made is cut off, which I hadn't previously noticed. Looking at that alone, I can see why you consider it ill-fitting. But, consider that the wide tensioner makes up for it in beauty. It's a feature of these early watches that isn't seen again. It makes the dial pop. No doubt you've given it a lot of thought to this. If you aren't able to find the smaller ring, you still have a pretty beautiful watch as-is.
The decision is not taken yet, but on the later 105.002-62 version with the baton hands a slimmer ring doesn't look bad at all. The watch shown in the MWO book has a black tension ring by the way: Cheers
Here are some pictures of slimmer tension ring, that my watch maker made out of brass. By the way does anyone know the treatment that was used by Omega for the shiny tension rings: Nickel plating? Rhodium plating? Thank you
I bought a 2998 that had the slimmer version but clearly had the wider as original. My view, which could be wrong, is that it should always be the wider. The slimmer is a version added later during service. Still have the slimmer if it can be of interest.
In my case the wider version was probably installed during service. Could eventually measure the width of the wider ring that you kept as a spare pat? Thank you
The “narrow version” I believe is: 063PZZ007755 (1957 trilogy) And the “wider version”: 063PZ5078 (2915, 2998, 105.002, 105.003-63, 105.012-63)
If going from wide to narrow ring, be aware there could be some wear on the dial from where the ring contacts it. my 2998 is apart at the moment and there is some wear that would be visible if I put the narrow ring on.
That’s not too bad at all. Mine is worse, but I quite like the wide ring so will keep it when it goes back together.
Personally I’d keep the wider ring, if nothing else to cover what seems to be gaps. To me they’d be more annoying the the Swiss made be part covered.