Roman Hartmann's list states that a 4835XXXX Speedmaster should be fitted with a 1861. 4834XXXX might have either a 861 or 1861. Someone I know has a 4835XXXX with a 861. Can this be the original movement? Should he conclude that the movement was swapped at one point?

Anyone's two cents is greatly appreciated!

 

I’d not go by that list.

If it’s luminova dialed it should be correct and accepted as so. 1861 with tritium are rare. It wouldn’t be wrong though.

 

I have a 4833 in a De Ville Prestige from 1997 and that is a Cal 861. From the research I did it appeared to be at the tail end of 861 production.

 

I have a 48351... speedmaster with a cal 861 movement but it has 18 jewels instead of 17.

Also a tritium dial.

I luv my speedy dates it to Nov 1996 which ties in with my own thoughts about a production date.

Hope this helps.

Also this thread needs some pictures.

movement pic from seller.

 

I find it curious that these 861 movements from 93-97 with 18 jewels still maintain a plate that says 17 jewels. It just seems odd that Omega didn't correct that.

 

It’s on lemania calibers too from 88-89 through 92 or so the same time frame as the Omegas. All versions of the Sinn903 with the lemania 1873 aka omega 861 are 18 jewels marked 17 also.

 

There is nothing wrong with the movements from a functional standpoint, but it just looks rather sloppy and penny pinching coming from a brand like Omega when they cannot be bothered to have a plate listing the correct number of jewels.

 

I’m thinking it had to do with an update and tariffs for more then 17 jewels still being on the books afaik they didn’t advertise it as 18 jewels till the 1861 even if later 861’s had 18.

 

I didn't know about that, but now it makes sense, though I've often wondered if the 18th jewel was actually needed or just a marketing spin to gain attention. Perhaps a watchmaker would know.

It sounds like the situation where JLC were importing movements into the US marked as unadjusted to avoid import duties. The cases were then made in the US as 14ct gold.

 

There’s a thread somewhere that shows it’s a wear spot. You can’t get the bushing anymore so any that get serviced will get the 18 jewel.

 

I am learning a lot; thank you. My father has a Cal 861 Speedmaster from 1971 that was recently serviced, but without checking the report I don't know if that was "upgraded" to 18 jewels. I can't help but thinking collectors would want these watches to remain as 17 jewels, not least to protect the value that comes from originality.

 

As I've said before when you have made this statement (not that long ago), the bushing is still available. I think it was you anyway...

However if you were to replace the entire coupling yoke, it can only be purchased with the jewel version.

Although the bushing can wear here, it's not under a high load, so it's mostly marketing. In fact there are two bushings on the original design, one for each pivot of the wheel. Only one was changed to a jewel, the top one that you can see, so if it was truly a wear issue they would have replaced both. Therefore...marketing.

 

Buy 17 jewels, get the 18th free?

 

Don’t think I’ve seen you say that. I’ve seen it said the other way repeatedly, thanks for the clarification

 

It was here, but possibly you didn't read the thread again after I posted it:

https://omegaforums.net/threads/strange-speedmaster-69st-on-the-bay-buyer-beware.82016/#post-1051869

So the whole assembly only comes with the jewel, but the bushing itself (which is used in several movements) can be ordered still. So if it's just worn bushings then you can order the bushings and swap them out. If some other part of the assembly is damaged, and the whole thing needs replacing, then it only comes with one jewel.

Cheers, Al