- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
145.00.22 dual reference model information
- Posts
- 10,454
- Likes
- 16,354
padders
··Oooo subtitles!You will raise some eyebrows using the adjective 'transitional' as that is usually reserved in Speedy circles for the very first 145.022, the -68 iteration. Why do you say it is a transitional? The latest 46m Speedy was dated April 1985 so I don't think it is either a 3590 or 3570, just a 80s 145.022. The 4.2.2. PIC code reference system didn't come in until the end of the 1980s.
Edited:
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
rootbeer7
·You will raise some eyebrows using the adjective 'transitional' as that is usually reserved in Speedy circles for the very first 145.022, the -68 iteration. Why do you say it is a transitional? The latest 46m Speedy was dated April 1985 so I don't think it is either a 3590 or 3570, just a 80s 145.022. The 4.2.2. PIC code reference system didn't come in until the end of the 1980s.
- Posts
- 678
- Likes
- 683
blueteg
·Many thanks. I’ve checked serial and it’s 1997 right at the end of the 145 run.
You sure about that? MWO book says the 145.022 ranges from 44M - 48M.
I've done a little searching for a birth year (1980) watch for myself and from the extracts that I've been able to find from 1979-1981, most of them are in the 44,xxx,xxx range.
I'm in agreement with @padders that the serial # would suggest that it's highly likely a mid-80's Speedmaster vs. 3590.50 or 3570.50
Edited:
- Posts
- 10,454
- Likes
- 16,354
padders
··Oooo subtitles!Many thanks. I’ve checked serial and it’s 1997 right at the end of the 145 run.
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
rootbeer7
·Apologies to both. I will recheck serial but I do remember checking on Speedmaster101 and it sits right in the 861/1861 movement range. Should I have said ‘dual reference’?
- Posts
- 10,454
- Likes
- 16,354
padders
··Oooo subtitles!Ok so 48.3m is likely to be an early tritium dial 3570,50 then. There is no dual reference model, it’s either/or. Is the movement marked 861 or 1861? If the latter it’s a 3570, if the former it could be either. Be aware that all the 1990s onwards models say 145.0022 in the caseback, it is the PIC that changes and that isn’t actually stamped on the watch anywhere. The biggest external tell is the bracelet which unfortunately it seems you don’t have.
Edited:
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
rootbeer7
·Ok so 48.3m is likely be an early tritium dial 3570,50 then. There is no dual reference model, it’s either/or. Is the movement marked 861 or 1861?
- Posts
- 10,454
- Likes
- 16,354
padders
··Oooo subtitles!That I haven’t checked. I will recheck full serial number. My receipt shows it as 145.00. I’m just interested in finding out what I can. Thank you for your help.
ps I do see what you mean about transitional now. The early 3570s from 97-98 can be viewed in that way.
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
- Posts
- 10,454
- Likes
- 16,354
padders
··Oooo subtitles!By using a dummy serial of 48,364,500 (ie the mid point), ILMS (productiondateprediction) has that as a 3570 from circa Sept 1997.
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
rootbeer7
·By using a dummy serial of 48,364,500 (ie the mid point), ILMS (productiondateprediction) has that as a 3570 from circa Sept 1997.
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
rootbeer7
·I've done a bit more digging, the dual ref is 145.0022 & 345.0022, there's a few online with similar serial numbers. When lockdown ends here I'll take it to someone to have a look at the movement. It's definitely a tritium dial!!
- Posts
- 3,785
- Likes
- 20,205
ahsposo
··Most fun screen name at ΩFBut it is not a transitional. You need to edit the thread title. Probably not n the right forum.
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
- Posts
- 10,454
- Likes
- 16,354
padders
··Oooo subtitles!To be fair, we have just recently discussed where the vintage to modern boundary now sits and one suggestion was that the cut off could now be considered the Tritium to SL transition which occurred 1997-98 in Omega. This watch would therefore be considered Nouveau vintage 😉
ps for the OP, don't get too excited about the 345/145 double description, the 345 just means it was a watch that came on the bracelet from the factory, it is not significant. Note yours has no bracelet so its technically a 145!
ps for the OP, don't get too excited about the 345/145 double description, the 345 just means it was a watch that came on the bracelet from the factory, it is not significant. Note yours has no bracelet so its technically a 145!
Edited:
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
rootbeer7
·Thank you to everyone. I’ve learned quite a bit. I contacted seller, who confirmed the model is in fact very late 145.00 and 1861 movement and the dual reference was as the model changed to 3570 as co-marked in some casebacks.
- Posts
- 10,454
- Likes
- 16,354
padders
··Oooo subtitles!Thank you to everyone. I’ve learned quite a bit. I contacted seller, who confirmed the model is in fact very late 145.00 and 1861 movement and the dual reference was as the model changed to 3570 as co-marked in some casebacks.
Yes it is needlessly complicated and confusing I agree!
Edited:
- Posts
- 597
- Likes
- 1,280
rootbeer7
·brilliant, thank you for all your help
Similar threads
- Posts
- 4
- Views
- 358
- Posts
- 23
- Views
- 2K
- Posts
- 3
- Views
- 791
- Posts
- 39
- Views
- 12K
- Posts
- 25
- Views
- 11K
