Good evening all,
I noticed an interesting listing pop up on eBay last week, for a 'GENUINE 145.012', and had a look at the pictures. It showed what looked very much like a straight lug watch (a 105.003) with a 1035/506 bracelet, and an 'authentication' from an Omega boutique, who had opened the case, noted the movement number (!), yet decided to label it as a 'probable' 145.012 - hence the listing's title. The seller paid Omega £95 for this 'authentication', which i find utterly bizarre that Omega seemed to not know to look inside the caseback of their own watch to determine what it was. Anyway, this was just the sort of listing i like to see: dreadful, blurred photographs, a seller with nothing else listed (currently or during the last 6mths) yet plenty of past feedback for other sorts of sales, and an auction-style listing. I exchanged a few messages with the seller and story was it was bought new by his late grandfather (a Navy serviceman), who left it to him c. 10yrs ago, and since then it just sat in it's box, save for an occasional wear at a family get-together. So on face value, a one-family watch. No service history. And interestingly, no discussion of it here on the forum or anywhere else... I'm sure lots of people here who, like me, love stalking eBay must have seen it, so I gathered either I was (and am) missing something, or everyone was keeping quiet. It felt a risky proposition, as it could easily have been a stitch-up - no extract, so could have been a big 'put-together' of random parts/aftermarket bracelet, or it could just have presented dreadfully in-hand as the photos were awful...or been damaged/not worked. But on Saturday morning I felt like a gamble and I went for it. I got it at £8.6k, against 10 other bidders.

It arrived this morning, and so far, I'm pretty happy. It looks good to me. A few observations, followed by some questions.

* The dial is an even grey/black ; the lume is thick, fairly straight, fully intact, an attractive yellow, and with a few hints of dirt ; the text and minute markers all look intact and apart from a small mark between 21 and 22 minutes, no blemishes that i can see. the lume glows under UV for a few minutes, but fades fairly quickly. So - is it a service dial ? It looks like it to me. But from when? And to be honest, i don't really mind as I like the look of it, service or otherwise - and that's all that really matters.
* The bezel is 'blacker' than i had imagined, with little fading - there's a fair few scratches and dings, so it's certainly not in good condition, but no dents to the outside or nasty fading. it looks good enough to me anyway.
* The case has definitely had a polish or two, but nothing too aggressive; lugs show their chamfers pretty well. a few marks on the outside of the top right lug (looks like pitting..not sure what happened there) but nothing too bad. The double-stepped caseback looks a bit scratched and a gorilla has tried (and failed) a few times to open it. not ideal. it's a 105.003-65, according to the inside case back.
* the movement actually looks pretty clean, no mangled screwheads or mismatched bridges ; movement number (2544xxxx) looks in line with other 105.003's i've seen. the gasket hasn't blown up all over the movement, so i suspect it must have had a service of some sort in the last (10-15?) years.
* i thought the hands might be later replacements as they look pretty bright, but they look correct? they've been removed at least once, from what i can tell. The 24-tooth crown has a the thin Ω logo, looks good to me ; pushers are suspiciously clean, but think they look okay too. the heavily-scratched crystal, strangely, doesn't have the Ω logo in the center. Don't understand that.
* 1035 bracelet has 26 links in total (perhaps it's missing a few?), very little stretch; the clasp is dated 1/68 and functions well, and has slightly bent 506 endlinks - but they're there.
* period-correct Omega box, apparently original to the watch....no idea whether true, but nice to have.

The problems, my next steps, and some questions:
* the chronograph starts correctly, but when i stop it, it 'flies back' to the start and resets. it's as if it functions as a 'stop and reset' in one click of the same button. so it clearly needs a good service, although it's actually keeping reasonable time.
* how the heck do you remove the bracelet, without injuring it (or me)? i'm really struggling with my Bergeon 6767 on those spring bars and can hardly get any purchase... I tend to prefer an Ed White on a cordovan leather strap, so (assuming i can remove the damn thing) might be tempted to sell the bracelet, given they appear to be reasonably sought after....although this would break-up what might be an original watch, which would be a shame. i'll have a think about that, and would appreciate your thoughts on the watch's originality. having a service dial would clearly make it emotionally easier to sell the bracelet.
* an obvious 'next step' would be to get an extract to find out whether this thing is the real deal - i'll do that and report back.
* thoughts on the dial? is it service?
* thoughts on the Ω-less crystal?
* thoughts on the overall economics? i feel Ed Whites have softened a bit of late, but unless i'm missing something glaringly obvious (which is very possible), this package, even with a service dial, seems below market value, which i wouldn't have expected in an open auction on eBay in this day and age. have these things repriced lower? Or does the service dial (assuming it is), really push the value lower?

Attached are a few photos i took ; unfortunately i'm not great with macro photography. let me know if you'd like to see more. any marks, except at 21/22mins, are on the crystal.

thank you vm in advance for any thoughts/comments on it's originality - and getting the bracelet off.

 

Dial and hands look relumed to my (untrained) eyes and hands also repainted. Can you please also share a pic of the bottom of the dial with the „T Swiss Made T“ area ?
Thanks

 

Attached, as requested. the 'T Swiss Made T' doesn't look blurred on the dial, that's just my dodgy photography. i'll take another tomorrow in daylight.
As an aside, I honestly can't imagine this chap getting the thing relumed, unless the story was completely made-up...but then he wouldn't have made the listing error? I understand Ed Whites often have 'wobbly'-looking (original) lume, if that's what's making you think it's relumed? Still, i might be wrong.

 

For me - I don’t have too much of an issue on the dial plots - although more close up pics and black light image would be beneficial. I like the dial.

I agree that the hands are ‘too’ white. No loss of paint on the very inner circle where the hand press would push against the hand makes me believe these are newly painted and installed.

The patina on the hands is very even. I’m not saying it’s not original but add my suspicion of the painted hands and I think it warrants a closer look.

Either way - I think this was a good buy at this price. Especially considering the bracelet and endlinks.

 

I like it. Strong case and and the dial lume looks original to me. I'd venture the hands are original as well. I own an Ed White but I'm far from an expert so you'll definitely get more informed opinions.

 

I thinks the pros will join this thread and state their opinion. For me the lume looks like „toothpaste“ allover the hour marker including the part above the step. Original lume on these step dials has a well defined step in the dial and also this shows a well pronounced step in itsself. That is completly missing here.

Additinally the hour markers upon the step are totally white where no (re) lume is pasted on. For me its a clear sign that the dial has been washed and the relume has been brought on later. But calling the master @Spacefruit to overtake this thread with his awesome experience

Best

 

Looks like some numbnuts used shoulderless spring bars. Trying to get those out yourself will be nearly impossible. Leave that to the watchmaker.

 

John, enjoy it. Too many doubts.....all is ok. Service it. Wear it. Be happy. Keep the band as well and have correct springbars installed. And, yes, the market is soft. But that changes all the time anyway. Kind regards. Achim

 

My 2c opinion : I think it looks great. Dial is clean (edit: with some marks near the center which won’t be visible on wrist), and whilst we dont normally see such thick puffy lume on this reference (we have seen a few) nothing screams relume to me. Hands I don’t think are repainted and relumed either...either original (and a very careful watchmaker did the service long ago) or are original omega tritium replacements...also fine in my book. Case looks unpolished to me...and it looks like a -65 case. Pushers look correct too. Odd the whole ‘verification’ thing : all they need to verify this watch is the movement serial number. Maybe the guy was truthful and sincere, maybe not : when watches and money and strangers are in the mix, don’t count on it at all. Perhaps you should apply online to Omega for an extract. If my 2c is correct and it is an all original unmolested 105.003-65, 8.6k GBP is quite a score especially including endlinks and bracelet.

 

Hi John. Photos can be misleading with artificial light, a nice outdoor pic in natural light will show it off best. Personally I think you’ve done very well

Enjoy!

 

Looks like you did well my friend, esp with the bracelet as part of the deal.

 

It was a smashing deal based on condition and likely original and correct hands. Dial and case are

 

regarding the bracelet I find quite often Omega's have a quick release spring bar fitted. See if there is a little notch

 

Hmmm, this is rather odd. i have handled many vintage watches over the years, but the only examples of the use of shoulderless spring bars in 'no lug hole' cases have been on (potentially one-owner/family) Speedmasters: a 145.022-71 and now this 105.003-65. Rather makes me think they were meant to be there... perhaps?

 

Thank you - nothing obvious.

 

Thank you very much. It's starting to feel like a pretty original watch ; agree the puffy lume is unusual in this reference. The inside caseback shows -65, so you're spot on (assuming the Extract confirms everything). This might also suggest the bracelet is original to the watch, as 'assessed' by the attached 'Valuation' (which Omega charged him for - very odd). Would suggest i shouldn't really be separating it.
So if it's untouched, that still leaves the 'Ω-less' crystal a mystery. I guess it cracked and was replaced in a non-Omega service at some point, with everything else left alone.

 

I have a 105.012-66 from the period with an omega-less crystal.

 

Interesting. And you think it's original?

 

A few more photos with natural light (via the window), showing the 'dirty' lume and paint on the hands close to the canon pinion.

 

the condition of the watch, plus the way I found it, makes me think so. Then again I have not been with it it’s whole life (it is older than I) so who can say. Production date was ‘67 I think...