can anyone tell me why these watches are both speedmasters and seamasters at the same time? your help would be appreciate your help TIA ira
Agree. Both are less than 100% original. Even if the dial is correct on the first, the hands and bezel aren't right for the dial. The second one is likely a dial replaced at service at some point. 176.005 is decidedly a Seamaster reference. The most common dial type have "wedge" hour markers (Type G as I call it here: https://omegaforums.net/threads/an-encyclopedia-of-omega-cal-1040-and-1041-dials.36789/) though the Type I dial shown on the first is seen frequently, and a member here even has a truly NOS 176.005 with that dial.
You mean this? The one the OP shows at least has the hour markers installed in the correct direction!
Ok. So I read this from chuck Maddox's site http://chronomaddox.com/omega/articles/mark_series/MarkSeries.html Seems both speedies and seamasters were sold in this configuration Now I'm more confused as they both have the same 176.005 model no. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I hate to disagree with the late great Maddox (especially as a newbie) but I strongly suspect all 176.005 to be Seamasters, and this particular dial being correct only for a 176.002 Speedy mk. III.
So how come there are so many "speedy" dials fitted to these watches in particular? Head getting mashed with this lol. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Chuck Maddox's article about the Mark Speedmasters that you reference was and still is the most important (IMO) article on cal. 1040 chronographs that I've found. I first read it while he was still alive and I continue to refer to it frequently. Chuck was funny, prolific, well-researched, and well connected. But to me his best attributes were his generosity to the community and also his willingness to evolve his often strong opinions when confronted with new information. I have a hunch that if Chuck were still with us he may have come to the conclusion that what he referred to as the IIIb, IIIc, and IVb are really just swapped dials. Nothing authoritative has ever surfaced pointing to these being original dial/case variants. The period ads and catalogs don't show them. And in recent years proof has surfaced that Omega has been known to accidentally install Mark III dials in other case references during service. Three possible reasons: 1. Intentional modding at service - the owner wanted a new look and sought out a different dial 2. Intentional "Frankenwatch" - can be done because the seller has a bunch of 1040 parts and wants to assemble a working watch with the resources he has, or to create something rare or unique to deceive buyers into thinking they are buying something rare and valuable 3. Unintentional replacement at service - due to the either the lack of appropriate replacement parts (Omega originally offered 27 dials for cal. 1040, they now carry 9), or the similarity of some replacement parts, the watch comes back with something other than what was ever originally for sale by Omega. This is known to happen. Also, for some reason, of all the cal. 1040 references 176.005 seems to be the reference that acquires the most deterioration. The crystal gasket is notoriously tricky, which may be the cause for so many decaying dials and bezels. If true, then they are more likely to get a new dial installed during service.