The crown 069ST42288 is used only for 2 cases: 055SU1450049 - FOIS case 055SUZ013385 - FOIS Met edition for the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC.
Hi All: Just joined OF so this is my first post, but I've been following this thread since it first started. I'm attaching pictures here of my 145.016-68 which I inherited about two years ago from my grandfather. Cal. 861 movement, Black Radial Dial. Unfortunately when I first got it, I didn't know any better and took it to Omega for servicing, so it has replacement crystal, pushers, hands (luckily I knew enough to make sure the case wasn't polished), but I still have all the original parts. This was the state of the watch when I first found it, we also found the original black lizard grain strap, but it was falling apart. This replacement strap was the closest that I found to the original. I was also able to fit the original Omega buckle to this strap. Finally, fitted the watch to an omega bracelet ref. 1098 with 598 end links (I know the correct ref is 1116/548, but those are difficult to find. 548 end links especially! My understanding is the 1098 bracelet is just slightly more narrow.). I had to bend the 'feet' of the 598 links to get them to fit the watch.
@Nick M. you are not allowed to disguise sales outside sales forums sections and you are not (yet) allowed to list watches for sale as long as you have only a few posts on the forums (<200) Reported
Thanks for the lesson, I genuinely meant no harm by posting it here. My apologies. The emoji and reporting me seems a bit harsh - but to each their own I suppose
Sure a great thread. Thanns to the OP. This is my 145.006 with sunburst case. Seems the hour and minutes hands were changed but think the rest of the watch can be all original
Don't take it personally. I am fairly new myself. There is a code of conduct that might at first seem harsh but these old timers have seen it all. After awhile you will admire their patience. Unfortunately this medium doesn't show facial expressions or tone of voice. They are actually quite harmless and cuddly.
From the first sight I would rather say that all the hands have been replaced : hour and minute hands are Speedmaster parts, too long and incorrect shape to the 145.006. The orange hand is too long as well and too modern to be vintage the subcounter hands look too new compared to the condition of the dial - that’s why I am thinking of a complete swap somewhen. The crown doesn’t look to be the correct vintage part as well. A honest watch that’s been serviced and refreshed with modern Speedmaster 321/861 parts somewhen in the last two decades. Enjoy It does : simply click/tap on my avatar picture
I'm new! Just thought I'd get your opinion on this watch I just purchased (Should be arriving sometime this week). I have 3 days to get a full refund if something doesn't seem to be legit (It's from a trusted online seller). Once I get it in I will definitely bring it to Omega AD and have it looked through. But before then, any comments would be appreciated. One thing I noticed and if someone can verify... it the Beads of Rice bracelet installed bottom side up???? And was a universal Omega Beads of Rice w/ universal endlinks sold during this time. Lastly and more importantly.... this doesn't look like a 1985 Omega right????
Hello and welcome here. This is a research thread - the purpose is to find and discuss every possible model of this family - not one particular watch you bought. The best to get opinions on a watch you bought or you’re about to buy is by starting your own thread in Omega Vintage Watches section. BTW there’s a lot to say about this one and I’m afraid you can prepare yourself mentally to a return and refund - I will gladly share why I think so in its proper thread.
Any opinions or did I make a dumb purchase? Thanks Tex! I will open up my own thread thanks! Please advise if you have time on the new thread! Thanks a million!!!
@ConElPueblo The dial I have shared pics of in the following post does have perfect lume plots. https://omegaforums.net/threads/seamaster-145-006-dial-question.121792/#post-1635067
Ah, okay. I think you may have misunderstood me then. The point of the above was concerning the combination of luminous hands and non-luminous dial, which to my knowledge shouldn't exist. Your dial would have been paired with luminous hands.