I have the same feeling. I recently contacted Omega to ask if a certain number on an old style warranty card was (1) a country code, and (2) legit (because I couldn't find the same code online anywhere). I received an answer mere hours later: it was a legitimate country code, but it is their policy not to confirm which country. A fast & useful answer - props to whoever handled my query

 

Hi Andy,
Great work.
I hope you don't mind me posting these pictures in your thread. They won't add to any of your data but I thought this would be the best thread to post them in for future reference for those interested in the Speedmaster 125, and your above quote in particular came to mind.

This is Jochen Berger winning navigator in the Acropolis rally of 1975 collecting his trophies along with driver Walter Rohrl.
Jochen is wearing his Speedmaster 125 and Walter his (Talisman*) Speedmaster Mk III.


Jochen was still wearing his Speedmaster 125 32 years later in this 2007 picture


and it looks like he continued to wear it right up until his death in 2010.


* more pictures of Walter's Mk III and an excerpt from his published diary, remembering the watch, in this thread.
https://omegaforums.net/threads/moo...e-speedmasters-driving-racing-heritage.40812/

 

That is very cool!

 

Another "outlier" serial number on eBay.

This Mark IV looks like it has flesh eating virus, inside and out:

If you zoom in on the rotor this appears to be a serial beginning with 40, placing it more than a million higher than any other cal. 1040 or 1041 I've seen. Not sure what to make of it other than serial numbers are anything but an exact science.

Link for anyone that wants some extreme patina : http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&alt=web&id=252439541533&globalID=EBAY-USPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

 

Anyone have a guess on what this watch actually is?
Seen here on eBay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/201618458501?_trksid=p2060353.m2763.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:ITPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

Caseback says 176.001, and the general shape of the overly-polished case seems to line up with 001. But have a look - there's a tachymetre bezel in there. There wouldn't be room for a 007 bezel in a 001 case. But a 007 case wouldn't have the flat area around the crystal. Maybe a 176.010? But there are no traces of the bevels around the edges and the flat area surrounding the crystal is raised like a bezel on the 010.


I'm stumped. My guess is someone Macgyvered a larger crystal onto a 176.001 case in order to accommodate the bezel OR Macgyvered an aftermarket bezel, as there is very little of the outer tick marks showing, whereas on a 176.007 you can still see the full tick marks even with the bezel. This one seems squished into the crystal and thus covers more of the dial.

Finally, have a look at the movement:

The serial number is engraved on the rotor (as expected for a cal. 1040) and the chronograph bridge (as would be expected for a 1041).



There is honestly so much weird 1040-related shit on eBay if you're crazy enough to start looking. So why am I wasting so much time on this bad example? I need to decide what reference to attach the serial to for my spreadsheet.

Serial and dial are right in the sweet spot for a 001, but could also be found in a 007. I'm going with: genuine 001, someone messed up the hands and jammed a tachy bezel where it didn't belong, plus overly polished the case and put the dial in the toaster.

Why the dual serials then? I have no clue. At least they match, right?

 

Prototype movement, and prototype tachy bezel

 

I think so, too. The OSA text order in combination with the caseback make it likely that the dial is from a 176.001. Also note how the 1/5th second track (don't know the proper name) is partially obscured by the bezel, as are the lume pips that should be above the hour markers). I think they took out the rehaut and replaced it with a 176.007 tachy ring (the font on the ring looks correct for a 007) that was just a little too large even without the rehaut.

Had it been a 176.0010 case, the tachy ring wouldn't have obscured part of the dial. And indeed the hands are obvioulsy incorrect.

No idea about the serial on the bridge. It's obvioulsy not a swapped 1041 movement. It could simply be that omega grabbed a bridge & rotor intended for a 125 or something.

You're very right about the weird 1040 stuff on the bay. Last night, I found this. I suspect redial - there's just too much going on.

 

SOLVED!

I think we're trying to say the same thing, only your explanation is much clearer than mine!

Agree, bad redial. Bad paintwork aside, if Omega was going to put the word "PROFESSIONAL" on a cal. 1040 Seamaster, wouldn't it have been the Big Blue?

 

Just found another 176.001 on eBay (incorrectly sold as a Yachting and asking $4900....) that also had the serial on the bridge. It does have a replacement rotor though, so we can't see if they match.

http://m.ebay.com/itm/Omega-Seamast...%3Ac5961c7d1550a60cd802a977fffbb770%7Ciid%3A2Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

Maybe we're onto a "thing" with 001s...serials on the bridge? I think it reads 31641054

 

I think maybe you are onto something! That particular example is a weird one, it's been on eBay forever with a ridiculous price ($4900???) and incorrectly described as you pointed out. Because of the replacement rotor, I had assumed the original SN was added to the bridge at service to keep track, but seeing another 001 with a SN on the bridge makes me wonder. Maybe early on on the 1040 production they put SNs in both places and eventually only put it on the rotor.

I wonder if I had missed any other "dual SNs"? It would be hard to track as movement pics often have the bridge hidden by the rotor. And I don't save the pics of the serials I've observed.

 

That's what I alluded to by "prototype movement".

 

Here's another one with serial at both places, just rotor and bridge only, FWIW. If there are many of them around, it'd be more likely that they belong to an earlier production batch that was changed later, than some prototypes.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/311647127405Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

 

That could very well be the case. The trick is then to find a serial below which they all have it. I'm definitely keeping my eyes open.

My early 007s don't have double serials. I also found this confirmed (relatively late) 176.001 that doesn't appear to have them, either. A good portion is obscured by the rotor, but we should be able to see the first couple of digits in this pic, if it had them. So it's not confined to the model 001. I'd bet there are 001s with double and single occurences, but only 007s with single ones.



It's a relatively late one:
31.642.285

The ones above that we confirmed as having both, all fall below that:
31.640.630
31.640.520
31.640.154
31.640.042

So while this doesn't prove anything, it doesn't disprove the hypothesis and makes it more plausible that all 1040s below a certain serial have it in both places. Now let's try to disprove it by finding a double occurence higher than 42.285. My bet is we can't!

Andy: what's the lowest and highest 176.001 you have in your database?

 

The lowest 001 I've seen is 31062280. Sadly, it's one of a handful that I don't have a comment/notes as to the source. I think that usually means that it is a serial from an old auction catalog (AQ, Philips, or Kaplans usually) that I gathered very early on before I got better about naming the source. Or maybe even a google image result.

I edited one of the serial numbers above, for the eBay "Yachting" 001. I think you transposed a 1 and 0.

 

And another:
http://www.ebay.it/itm/331644221920Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

 

Fascinating thread on a model I've not previously 'noticed'. It's great to see someone really getting down into detail and making such as wealth of data freely available - full respect to you Andy.

 

Found a nice 176.004 Big Blue on eBay. The bezel is missing, but the dial has interesting patina



For Andy's records: the serial seems to be 34245506.

 

Yes I've seen that one, but I have it down as 34245508:

Interesting is one way of putting it! Honestly, what could have done that to the dial? And the rotor marks? That poor watch has been abused.

 

I was just browsing Chuck Maddox' website when I came across this 1040 equipped frankenbeauty:



A DON bezel, no less. Did anyone see one like that before?

Oh, and I found Chuck's Yachtmaster 176.010 serial, in case Andy didn't have it listed already. It's 35604639.

 

I had that serial linked to a TZ for sale ad from 2008. I think that it actually wasn't Chuck's, he refers to the watch and description as belonging to "Ian".

Do you have a link to that gold one on Chuck's site? I have that pic saved from a thread on VRF. Curious to know what Chuck thought. I wonder what case that was? A solid gold Speedmaster Pro? Unlikely. A gold-plated reduced? Maybe, I'm just surprised the movement and dial fit!