105004-64 newbie

Posts
231
Likes
339
Hi there,

new on this forum I was reading along for some months, now it is time to step forward and try my first post here. I hope the pics will show. My meandering through the fields of collecting watches was focused on military watches for some years, but now interest rises for this marvelous brand. Meanwhile things seem to shift ...

Coming from collecting military watches, I am happy with watches that show some wear and patina. So this one was the first chrono I bought some years ago, not knowing much about Omega: all I wanted was a steel-cased collumwheel chrongraph, affordable and much cheaper than the beloved collumwheel-Speedy: I ended up with this haevily used and polished 105004-64:



I always felt like the pushers were to long and bent. But it was running fine and my watchmaker was happy with it when giving it a service. So I ended up wearing it quite a bit.

I thought I try with this watch as first post on this forum, since it was my first contact with the brand. Others came later....

Best regards,

caselock
 
Posts
8,630
Likes
71,382
Nice watch.
Welcome to OF
 
Posts
203
Likes
321
Very nice, even if worn. Unfortunately the dial was reprinted at some point in his life.
It's the only flaw I see, and for some this could be a problem.
Anyway enjoy it, it's a super watch!
 
Posts
2,929
Likes
6,105
Welcome ! Nice model! As said above: enjoy this watch!

btw and @daderaz : why reprinted? Is it the r? "Wrong" indexes??

IMO lume seems to be (original?) tritium?

 
Posts
5,071
Likes
15,650
why reprinted? Is it the r? "Wrong" indexes??

‘Seamaster’ looks totally wrong. Subregister index markers are also not correct in position or length with respect to the subregisters. The subregister text is also wrongly printed: (to me it looks too small/thick). I havent bothered to check other things. Do a google image search on this super rare reference and you will see what i mean.
 
Posts
13,203
Likes
22,964
Lovely watch and great daily wearer but there’s no question - the dial has been repainted.
 
Posts
363
Likes
1,274
Hi and welcome to OF

In my opinion the dial isn't correct for a 105.004. I can't remember that I have ever seen this style on a 105.004. (style is more like a dial from the 50is; for me it seems like that it was redialed)

Serial is in the correct range for a 105.004. Lume is radium
Best
Duffy
 
Posts
231
Likes
339
Thank you for the warm welcome!

And thank you for the infos:
I was not aware of the redial since it shows signs of aging: it hat some spots and a slight scratches, so I figure it was redialed some time ago and had services since. Too bad that these white/light dials decay so fast or show stains etc. very early in their life...
I thought these pushers should be wider and shorter, they are sticking out quite a bit...
 
Posts
13,203
Likes
22,964
Thank you for the warm welcome!

And thank you for the infos:
I was not aware of the redial since it shows signs of aging: it hat some spots and a slight scratches, so I figure it was redialed some time ago and had services since. Too bad that these white/light dials decay so fast or show stains etc. very early in their life...
I thought these pushers should be wider and shorter, they are sticking out quite a bit...

I agree the pushers seem to be generic replacements.
 
Posts
514
Likes
794
Thank you for the warm welcome!

And thank you for the infos:
I was not aware of the redial since it shows signs of aging: it hat some spots and a slight scratches, so I figure it was redialed some time ago and had services since. Too bad that these white/light dials decay so fast or show stains etc. very early in their life...
I thought these pushers should be wider and shorter, they are sticking out quite a bit...

Actually many redials have even happened early in the life of the watch. You'll come across many threads at the forum where people say a watch has never been touched, while obviously it has been, but probably too long ago to remember
 
Posts
762
Likes
9,289
In this reference 105.004-64 there were also dials without a tachymeter. Were they rarer? How does this relate to value?



 
Posts
13,203
Likes
22,964
In this reference 105.004-64 there were also dials without a tachymeter. Were they rarer? How does this relate to value?




Id say the market values dials with a tachy slightly more, but the difference is negligible as condition plays a much, much larger part
 
Posts
5,071
Likes
15,650
Also, increased-rarity != increased-value in all instances … that is very much herd-dependent…
 
Posts
762
Likes
9,289
Thanks for the answer. I have one more question, which one is worth more: 105.001-62 or 105.004-64 without a tachymeter? Both in similar condition

 
Posts
363
Likes
1,274
For me it is the 105.001 which has a higher value. I prefer the alpha hands and the tachymeter but this is only my opinion.
 
Posts
13,203
Likes
22,964
Thanks for the answer. I have one more question, which one is worth more: 105.001-62 or 105.004-64 without a tachymeter? Both in similar condition


Id say there’s no significant difference. They’re both about the same
 
Posts
762
Likes
9,289
Id say there’s no significant difference. They’re both about the same

I share your opinion. The 105.001 has alpha hands, but the 105.004 does not have a tachymeter. In my opinion, the 35mm dial looks much nicer on the hand without the tachymeter. The movement is the same, so there is no difference
 
Posts
514
Likes
794
Am I right in saying that it's quite hard to price these, as there are simply not so many being sold, and that condition is the key determinant? Other than indeed, 'the older ones with alpha hands command some premium'