Hi there,

I’m about to buy a new Connie, which I think is quite sharp, piepan dial with lume.

The extract of archive (EOA) says that the watch is from January 1964, and tell about the dial “silvered” but do not say more and do not tell that indexes have tritium.

My previous 168.005 from 1966 also had an EOA, but it says about the dial “silvered with luminous indexes”.

So, is there a risk that the new one I’m about to purchase does not have his original dial (maybe swapped at some point) or is it just that Omega did not have all informations about some watch?

I will add that the new one was delivered in Europe in 1964, but the other one was delivered in Mexico in 1966.

Thanks for your help

 

My mistake, I’ve posted in a hurry, should have took time.

here is the new one I’m talking about

 

If I understand you correctly, you are asking if the EOAs always note lume if there is lume on the dial?
Or do EOAs for watches from an earlier period not record the fact?

The dial has no Ts but it is essentially a ‘63 watch so that could be correct.

However, I don’t know about EOAs, so will let others who do comment on those.

 

I‘ve had a similar question recently. Short answer for the above question would be no.

Here‘s the thread I‘m referring to:

https://omegaforums.net/threads/information-provided-in-the-omega-extract-of-the-archives.114721/

 

Thanks, that is exactly what I was looking for.

So it is one more thing that make me thinking that EOA are maybe not worth it... it only confirm that the mouvement is in the good case or not (at least the same case version that the one when leaving the factory) , nothing more

 

Is it bad form to ask what sort of money a good 168.005 564 cal on leather is worth these days?

 

There are many variables, these days one man's 7.5/10 is another man's 12/10, it all depends. But no one can put a price on a watch without pictures