Any ideas?

Posts
5,636
Likes
5,800
No one has said it yet, so I’ll say it. Don’t send it to Omega for servicing. They will ruin its vintage character. You need to find a watchmaker who has experience servicing vintage timepieces.
Or you might choose to do that and to hell with the collectors.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with advising but stop telling people what do do with their own property! It's theirs, NOT YOURS.
 
Posts
17,634
Likes
36,878
Could be an insert from a travel clock, but the crown was usually at the 6 for those, and mostly had an alarm.

I think it may be a CK1055 where the bow was part of the case and has been removed.

However, without more detailed pictures we can only guess.

17032412505319182114941443.jpg

Catalog picture from collection of @Tire-comedon.

@OMTOM, any ideas?
 
Posts
560
Likes
1,440
Thanks Jim.
I think the movement is calibre 37.5.

Dating from movement numbers (because they were produced in batches) is difficult - but comparing it with my own, I would guess it dates 1938, probably with a case number 943****

I think the spot by @JimInOz (showing ‘Catalog picture from collection of @Tire-comedon’) is on the nail (good spot Jim!). There is another image of a CK1055 on Page 98 of AJTT. I show an image which compares the OP’s watch with another CK1055.

At this time, Omega made pocket watches with calibres 37.5, 37.6 and 38.5, with many variations of dial, hands, stem/bow, case and case material. What is unusual here are the 1/5th marks on the minute scale - which would normally have been used on a watch with a centre second hand (such as a chronograph). The reference 1055 (CK1055 for steel, OJ- /OT1055for gold) had these 1/5th marks - and also the (lovely!) pontife hands.

Whilst it sounds plausible that this watch was part of a travel case, Omega didn’t use this calibre in a travel case (or other ‘unusual’ forms). The sharp edges to the case were not because of it fitting into a mount or stand - they were the style of the case. It is most likely that the original stem/bow were at some time removed - and if the OP shows us a detailed image of the top of the case, this might be apparent.

In summary, my bet is a CK1055 dating about 1938 with ‘modified’ (removed) stem/bow.

As for servicing, if the OP so desires, it shouldn’t be too difficult a task for any (proper) watchmaker.
 
Posts
20
Likes
11
My guess is that it's a travel "clock" that would have been pressed into a folding case.
I agree and I have looked but seen nothing similar
 
Posts
20
Likes
11
Thanks Jim.
I think the movement is calibre 37.5.

Dating from movement numbers (because they were produced in batches) is difficult - but comparing it with my own, I would guess it dates 1938, probably with a case number 943****

I think the spot by @JimInOz (showing ‘Catalog picture from collection of @Tire-comedon’) is on the nail (good spot Jim!). There is another image of a CK1055 on Page 98 of AJTT. I show an image which compares the OP’s watch with another CK1055.

At this time, Omega made pocket watches with calibres 37.5, 37.6 and 38.5, with many variations of dial, hands, stem/bow, case and case material. What is unusual here are the 1/5th marks on the minute scale - which would normally have been used on a watch with a centre second hand (such as a chronograph). The reference 1055 (CK1055 for steel, OJ- /OT1055for gold) had these 1/5th marks - and also the (lovely!) pontife hands.

Whilst it sounds plausible that this watch was part of a travel case, Omega didn’t use this calibre in a travel case (or other ‘unusual’ forms). The sharp edges to the case were not because of it fitting into a mount or stand - they were the style of the case. It is most likely that the original stem/bow were at some time removed - and if the OP shows us a detailed image of the top of the case, this might be apparent.

In summary, my bet is a CK1055 dating about 1938 with ‘modified’ (removed) stem/bow.

As for servicing, if the OP so desires, it shouldn’t be too difficult a task for any (proper) watchmaker.
 
Posts
20
Likes
11
Thanks Jim.
I think the movement is calibre 37.5.

Dating from movement numbers (because they were produced in batches) is difficult - but comparing it with my own, I would guess it dates 1938, probably with a case number 943****

I think the spot by @JimInOz (showing ‘Catalog picture from collection of @Tire-comedon’) is on the nail (good spot Jim!). There is another image of a CK1055 on Page 98 of AJTT. I show an image which compares the OP’s watch with another CK1055.

At this time, Omega made pocket watches with calibres 37.5, 37.6 and 38.5, with many variations of dial, hands, stem/bow, case and case material. What is unusual here are the 1/5th marks on the minute scale - which would normally have been used on a watch with a centre second hand (such as a chronograph). The reference 1055 (CK1055 for steel, OJ- /OT1055for gold) had these 1/5th marks - and also the (lovely!) pontife hands.

Whilst it sounds plausible that this watch was part of a travel case, Omega didn’t use this calibre in a travel case (or other ‘unusual’ forms). The sharp edges to the case were not because of it fitting into a mount or stand - they were the style of the case. It is most likely that the original stem/bow were at some time removed - and if the OP shows us a detailed image of the top of the case, this might be apparent.

In summary, my bet is a CK1055 dating about 1938 with ‘modified’ (removed) stem/bow.

As for servicing, if the OP so desires, it shouldn’t be too difficult a task for any (proper) watchmaker.
 
Posts
560
Likes
1,440
Does this help

I’m afraid it doesn’t help much. As you have already gathered, you present a bit of a mystery. I have tried to show (with markings on your image) that away from the crown the (front) bezel and (rear) caseback line up with the case of the watch - but not where the crown is. Maybe the stem was removed and the case polished back?


What is missing is a view of the inside of the caseback - which would usually give at least a case number. You tell us that there’s nothing. So I don’t think you’ll get much more.

In your first post, you said that you were looking to restore the watch - which will be difficult! I show a couple of similar 37.5 watches (dials are of course different from yours) to show the way your watch probably started.
Sorry not able to offer more.
 
Posts
5,636
Likes
5,800
I agree and I have looked but seen nothing similar
Hmmmmm. Maybe a car clock? Is there evidence of wear from a bracket it might have fit in?
 
Posts
560
Likes
1,440
Maybe a car clock?

It might have been used in a car. Who knows? But it wasn't designed by Omega as a car clock. Omega did produce clocks/watches for cars - many versions over the years - but not with this movement/case. If used in a car, it would only after having been 'modified'.
 
Posts
5,636
Likes
5,800
It might have been used in a car. Who knows? But it wasn't designed by Omega as a car clock. Omega did produce clocks/watches for cars - many versions over the years - but not with this movement/case. If used in a car, it would only after having been 'modified'.
Yeah, it was a stretch. My only real thought is that it was recased for some purpose that is not obvious.
 
Posts
20
Likes
11
I’m afraid it doesn’t help much. As you have already gathered, you present a bit of a mystery. I have tried to show (with markings on your image) that away from the crown the (front) bezel and (rear) caseback line up with the case of the watch - but not where the crown is. Maybe the stem was removed and the case polished back?


What is missing is a view of the inside of the caseback - which would usually give at least a case number. You tell us that there’s nothing. So I don’t think you’ll get much more.

In your first post, you said that you were looking to restore the watch - which will be difficult! I show a couple of similar 37.5 watches (dials are of course different from yours) to show the way your watch probably started.
Sorry not able to offer more.

Thank you for all your input and advice.
As I've now got the seconds hand replaced and a new glass with a lubricant inside too, she works fine and looks better
Maybe it was a pocket watch after all
 
Posts
560
Likes
1,440
Now that it’s functional I suggest you forget about its origins, keep it in your pocket and pull it out occasionally to check the time. Since nobody wears a watch nowadays (and most can’t tell the time), you’ll become a centre of interest - enjoy it! If you’re really lucky, the girls will think it’s ‘sweet’!
 
Posts
5,636
Likes
5,800
Now that it’s functional I suggest you forget about its origins, keep it in your pocket and pull it out occasionally to check the time. Since nobody wears a watch nowadays (and most can’t tell the time), you’ll become a centre of interest - enjoy it! If you’re really lucky, the girls will think it’s ‘sweet’!
What he said. You might also consider recasing it.
 
Posts
20
Likes
11
Hmmmmm. Maybe a car clock? Is there evidence of wear from a bracket it might have fit in?
No signs of any wear at all