Nice write-up!

I do not want to split hairs, but there are a few places the roles of Omega and Lemania within the SSIH is not precise.

Omega did not develop the 1040, nor any other chronograph movements between early 1930s and modern times. That was all done by Lemania.
Within SSIH, Lemania was assigned the role of designing and manufacturing movements with complications for the group members. Omega did not have these capabilities in-house. Only in the 1980s was the production tools for the cal 861, and most likely some persons, moved to Bienne from l'Orient. Complete watches was in general assembled entirely in l'Orient by Lemania.

As Omega was the big name within the SSIH group, special features was kept unique for them. You will also find this with the caliber 980 Memomatic "setting alarms to the minute" (vs Lemania 2980) and the cal 381 full moonphase (vs Lemania 3300) and of course the 24h indicator for the 1040/1041.

The choice of dropping the bumper based automatic movement created in 1947 (not 1946) was not made by Lemania themselves. The final vote to scrap it was actually made by the chairman of Omega according to the books.


The 1045 is by the way a re-branded Lemania 5100 without any alterations. Due to the course of history, when SSIH had to sell of Lemania in order to stay afloat, the 5100 was also made available to other brands in the "full version" with the 24h indicator. True to tradition, Lemania had also here created a "lesser" version"; the 5012.
The loss of Lemania within the SSIH also resulted in Omega using standard ETA movements (1130) in their later designs.

 

Finally an Apple watch I like!!!

 

And my 007:

 

Well, I hadn't noticed the text order before (interesting catch), but note that AJTT shows at least two examples with such ordering, one nearly identical to your blue (but with the - I believe - earlier 'needle' hour hand, and the sun-brushed dial where yours appears to be matte):



The second in AJTT is a gold-plated version, with the gilt varient dial:



So, while AJTT isn't definitive, at the very least it seems there are some blue-faced 007s with the text order same as yours, and even gilt versions with it - the latter definitely suggesting that proper 007s could have this text order variation. Note that both versions from AJTT have the similar applied indices variation as yours as well (with both applied indices plus five-minute numerals, as compared with versions that only have applied indices without five-minute numerals except at the quarters).

 

Wow! Truly an outstanding treatise! Did I read it all? No...probably not more than 5% ; sometimes I have a very short attention span. If I had an interest in collecting this particular caliber, this would be my go-to source of information. Thank you for posting this here!

 

If my review ever suggests that Omega itself made the 1040, rather than Lemania producing it for Omega specifically, then it's both an error and also contra to the numerous other places I hope I make the distinction more clearly!

Are you certain the 1045 is without any alteration from the 5100? At the very least, the Omega 1045 is beryllium-copper plated whereas the 5100 is not, but perhaps in your view (and I'm not disagreeing) the plating was simply part of the 'rebranding.' In either event, it is still the case that Lemania purpose-built the Omega 1045's for Omega-only, even if that effort consisted only of differing plating and stamping of the movement.

Finally, is the picture you posted supposed to be the 1946/7 prototype designed by Piguet? If so, the date on the movement is interesting insofar as all of the Omega-related histories I've seen place the prototype in 1946. Clearly, October is pretty deep into 1947, which raises at least two questions: (1) why and when did someone desire to date-stamp a prototype movement, and (2) what are folks at Omega/Lemania considering the 'design date' of the movement (as opposed to a completed prototype - or is it prototypeS?).

 

Oh, and no one has yet noticed my largest error in the whole thing: on the page with various 007 examples, I've accidentally included a pic of some franken-Mark III type watch!

In my rush to get this thing tidied up (it'd been sitting at 85% complete for almost 2 1/2 years), I left a detail or two unpolished throughout, but including that particular picture is unforgivable! I'll replace the pic/page once I've got a spare minute or two!

 

These are mine, with the two gold cal.1040's seeing regular wrist-time, and the Wakemann Lemania cal.1340 being dead NOS (with bracelet also), the Rogue Jedi seeing some wrist time, and the two stainless 007's for good measure. The blue 007 I believe to be a very early version, with matte dial, and no applied hour-markers. That the black-faced 007 has applied markers with numerals on them, and a 'closed' date window, but little else to suggest whether such dials are or are not correctly found on 007s (there are just so many dial/hour-marker variations it is difficult to be definitive).

 

The picture is the 1946/47 movement. I guess work started in 1946?
I have read that the date is for when it was displayed to the public/board of SSIH.
Here's the face:

As for the 1045 vs 5100 they can swap any part. Color of plates and bridges obviously differs, but that is purely cosmetic.

 

Wow - I didn't realize that the 'prototype' was not just a movement, but even a completed auto-chrono watch?

This, to me, calls into question further details when people debate whether the Breitling group, Zenith, or Seiko built the 'first' auto-chrono: surely, that debate lives on in terms of which company first mass-produced and marketed an auto-chrono, but discussions on the topic are not couched in these 'mass-produced and marketed' terms, and are instead typically debating which company 'made the first auto-chrono.' If Lemania put together an entire working prototype 20 years earlier, that bears mentioning in the Breitling/Zenith/Seiko debates.

Where can I find more information on the photos you've provided of the movement and the watch itself?

- CB

 

This site used to have an article that is now gone: https://www.hautehorlogerie.org
Also some info here:
http://forumamontres.forumactif.com...ographe-bracelet-automatique-daterait-de-1947

Find me one, and I will happily throw inn all my watches, and one kidney into the deal!
Come to think of it I could be tempted to offer both kidneys if pushed......

 

Mine is the sun-brushed dial, amateurish photography skills just make it look matte in those pics! I agree some 007 dials have the OSA ordering, but it seems much less common. Maybe just the first few 007s as they cleared out 001 part stock or service replacements. Who knows. The GP case/dial combinations have a logic or lack thereof) all their own.

 

great review....

 

Looks like I know who to sell my silver-dialed .005 rogue-jedi to when the time comes! Really impressive family you've got there.

 

I noticed it! Chuck Maddox referred to these as Mark III(b). I assumed you had left it in intentionally. I personally agree that these are more likely to be Frankenwatches and probably were NOT legitimate variants, but I think a lot of people still consider them true Mark IIIs. In general, I think there's a lot of conflicting views on certain dial configurations out there.

I had always just taken Chuck's work as gospel (still do for most of it), but @Lou P was the first to plant the seeds of doubt on the Mark III(b) in my mind about a year ago, and since then I've spent a lot of time studying and cataloging cal.1040 dials trying to keep a skeptical and critical eye out for other evidence that could challenge what we assume we know. There are plenty of patterns found in the chaos, and for every pattern there are usually multiple exceptions but that's what makes this hobby so fun, right? One of these days I'll compile my observations into a comprehensive post, but I guarantee it won't be as well-presented as @cvalue13 's post!

 

Great review! Thanks alot

 

The Speedmaster Mark III(b) (if those are a real thing) in my photo is definitely unintentional.

A separate topic/issue, though, are the few examples that are marked Seamaster Mark III's - which is an entirely different animal/issue.

 

Your thoughts on those? The pics I've seen look less than convincing to my eye- more like aftermarket redial jobs. However some of the old threads purporting to show "authentic" ones have links to pics that no longer work so I have seen very few.

 

It is my experience that the Omega 1045 has a few pieces that are not found on the 5100. That is, at least, what a then-authorized Omega watch repairer told me. I believe the differences were limited to a few wheels and, of course, hands and case items. But you are essentially correct: The Omega 1045 is nearly identical to the Lemania 5100.

I thought that Lemania was folded into Breguet which, at least until recently, still used a version of the 1340 in some of their watches. Correct me if I am wrong, but the only thing that changed was the Lemania name ceased to exist as a separate entity.

 

I will await anyone that can show other than cosmetic differences between the 1045 and 5100. It would surprise me a lot!

After Lemania was sold in order to raise funds for the almost bankrupt SSIH group, the company was bought by private owners led by the Piaget family. In June 1982 (Nouvelle) Lemania, backed by the Piaget family obtained the ownership of Heuer.
Heuer was sold of to TAG in June 1985, and Lemania remained independent until it was purchased by Breguet in 1992.
In 1999 Breguet, and subsidiaries including Lemania, was sold on to Swatch Group.

The Swatch Group.later decided to let the Lemania name die peacefully in order for Breguet to become a proper manufacture (during the previous decade Breguet had been supplied with movements from Lemania). With the rising focus on high end watches being fully made "in house" it was the easy way out.
Current day Breguet Manufacture HQ is at the same address in l'Orient that Lemania held during decades before.
The cal CH27 (as in Omega 321) have been sold as ebouches to "all" the big names such as Patek, VC and others. Breguet still uses this movement base. The cal 1340 have evolved further, and its latest iterations are found in the Breguet type XX/XXI watches.