I’ve just got the one Constellation, a 1954 gold-cap in the 2652 screw-back case with the 354 bumper movement. It needs the correct crown, but I really like the dial on this one (I’m not a fan of the later pie-pans), the case is pretty sharp, the 354 is serviced and running well and I have no wish to collect any more Connies -



But, and it is a big but, the case back is not so good. The gold observatory medallion is a bit worn (but you can still see all the stars), however there are some nasty pits in the stainless steel surround. This has always annoyed me and I’ve never been really happy with the watch as a result



Strangely, the pits don’t look so bad in the photo as they do in life. I think as you move it against the light different ones show up. Still, you get the idea, and I assure you that there are some seriously deep holes in there.

So, browsing eBay (as one does) I stumbled across a listing for a case back for a 2652, on a site with virtually no other Omega stuff whatever. The photos were poor, but it looked OK, so I took a chance, bid on it against some pretty fierce competition, and won. When it arrived all the way from the USA I was amazed. It was listed as used, but it looks almost new. There are no service history marks on the inside at all and just the lightest of scratches to the polished outer. My original back was 2652-17, this one is 2652-22. After a pleasant interlude and a light clean the new back was installed and Whammo – the rear view was transformed!



Here is a close up of the medallion, which looks so fresh that I am going to be worried about wearing the watch now -



So I suppose the next job is to track down the correct crown, which I think should be the narrow decagonal style – is that correct?

 

Gator, as usual, is correct - that clover crown might be the original.

 

Yes, that is very interesting. I wondered whether it might be a service part, it just looks so fresh. Here is the seller's photo of the inside of the back, as you can see it has all the usual perlage and marks -



It would not be surprising if it was from Watchco.

 

Well, I'm always happy not to have to spend money I shall leave well alone, as you both advise. I expect you will both think me crazy for the amount I had to pay for the back - $167 USD would you believe. But looking at the watch now it does seem worth it.

 

I don't think that's out of the ballpark for a back in that kind of shape. For a round number, let's say the watch is worth $1000. It's fair to say an excellent condition medallion is at least 16.7% of the value IMO. If you decide to sell the original case back, you'll get most of your money back or maybe more.

 

Nice catch

 

I'm inclined to think that the clover crown is not original. Given the wear, although only moderate, of the case back medallion and generally nice patina of the case with a gentle round on the lines of the bezel and lugs, I would think the crown would not be so sharp if it was original to the watch. Also, is the crown partially pulled out in the pic? Otherwise it would appear to not be sitting as snugly over the crown pipe as it should.

I've been collecting Constellation ads for quite a number of years and I have never seen an ad showing these earlier Connies with a clover crown. Seen plenty of ads for 2852 models and beyond, and a 1956 version of the 14355. But, I think in these earlier 2648 and 2652 models there appears to be a consistency in the decagonal crown. This is not the slim decagonal, but the fatter version that fits the 2.5mm pipe size. They're still available at Otto Frei.

Cheers

Desmond

 

Hi Evan,

Nice hearing from you.

Yes, I agree about some US imported models that have OXG on the movement having bowler hat crowns (mine had OXG and a bowler hat as you observed) but I was talking about cloverleaf crowns in ads of the earliest models. They begin to appear, in my observations, after 1955/56.

The later replacement decagonal crowns, I agree, are marginally different, but still bulkier than the crowns for the later 2mm pipe size models. Re Batei's 2652 and Globemaster, I have always assumed them to be replacements because I could see no printed evidence in catalogues or ads where cloverleaf crowns are shown on the earliest of the models.

But, as we have both observed in the past, one must never say never where Omega is concerned. I feel, however, the decagonal is reflective of the original design story, but am more than happy to concede that cloverleafs and bowler hats, along with a thin rounded crown on a few cal 561 models, were just some of the inconsistencies we see in both ads and in real examples.

Regards

Desmond

 

Oh dear. Guess who had been messing with the hands to set them at ten past ten for photography and forgot to push the crown back in? Yep, you guessed it. So the crown does actually sit snugly down as it should, just not in these pictures . . .

 

John, Extremly nice connie and caseback. I've only just seen this post properly and I think you did very well there. And I tend to agree these types of dials look really nice in the flesh!

 

I forgot pushing the crown many times, then realized when I saw it on eBay

Really nice watch, congrats

 

Alex, thank you. This dial is really quite special, the inner part is not reflective but the outside is. And you get some really magical highlights and reflections in it from the arrow batons, which makes wearing the watch quite an occasion in itself. Unfortunately, my photograph has not captured this at all.

 

That dial may be a late run of the 2652's. (?)

Most of them have OMEGA printed in ink, first generation fonts and Omega logo with rounded edges.

 

Thanks for bringing this up Hoi and Mike. I noticed that and I was wondering that myself. My 2652s are also printed Omega but is it still possible that the later ones have applied ones? Which are the earliest ref. you've seen with applied OMEGA? Thanks and apologies for hijacking the OP.

 

I believe the 2652 was produced from and including 1952 to 1954 when it was replaced by the 2782. I've see fully papered 2652s sold as late as 1956 (usual supply chain lag), and while the dial could be a later replacement (say in the first three years of its life), by 1954 we do see the emergence of the applied logo on both 2782s and the second batch of 2799s.

Omega had several dial makers contracted to produce Constellation dials, and that's why I think we see variances of applied and non-applied logos on,say, the 2799 and perhaps 2652. I have seen a few late 2652s with applied Omega logo, however I've never seen a 2648 with applied logo. But, the thing that makes the dial a likely candidate for a late 2652 is the double crossed t in the Constellation lettering. So in some, but not all, respects the serial number may tell a fuller story I think.

Regards

Desmond