Here is my biggest mistake:

It is a 105.002-62. I bought it in Asia sight unseen some years ago - before you make that face, its my money, and usually this source does OK. However in this case they really pushed me in the mud.

It has new hands and worse, a new dial. The shoddy bezel is just a little garnish to this terrible assembly.

So I have been looking ever since for something to help it. that dial is a strange one, long indices, no Pro, and no AML. Possibly a service dial, anyway I don't like it..

This is where I am now:





Its not ideal, but its where I am.

Lets see if my hands are steady enough this weekend....

 

Mishaps can happen, made the same mistakes.

This was my first 105.003


and i dont even have the excuse of not seeing it before i bought it.

But one question to your new hands, the hour hand looks a bit large doesnt it?

 

I have just checked and yes, it is not the correct hand. Annoying!


So I am using another set. I do wonder what the large hour hand is from? (4th from the right)




These ones need a clean.

 

This one looks better, now about the dial, it has no step, is it from a 1957 Replica? or a vintage no step dial?

 

The long hand is longer than the others, which I believe are for 2998's and 105.002. (They match those on my 2998's whereas the longer hand is longer than any of the others.)

is the hand on the 2915-3 longer?

I have checked "the book" but it does not help.

 

This is a great post.
Given where I am in my collecting, it's encouraging to see more experienced collectors this transparent. I'm warming up even more to attempting a project of my own.

Thank you

 

Interesting. So all this time when we read the throw away line "The 2998 is simply a 2915-3 with a new number" it isn't.

After digging around the net I harvested these pictures - as they are all in public domain I have not attributed all of them but done my best.


A 2915-3 with the longer hour hand, a few mm short of the hour marker.


Another also a few mm short of hour


2915-3 again


And here is a 2915-3 with Hour and Minute hands that are all too short. Possibly from a seamaster?

and finally a 2998-1 with what I hope are the correct hands

 

Given "After digging around the net I harvested these pictures - as they are all in public domain I have not attributed all of them but done my best."

Another delightful (& puzzling) piece of the discussion. So if I can find another example like mine on the web then the likeliness mine is okay is better? I'm afraid this merely contributes to our collecting being wide open to 'interpretation'. Meaning it can be bewilderingly impossible to determine if one example is real or not. My 2cents....

Its soooo much easier to take the conservative line. Omega won't settle this either, so far as we've seen