Forums Latest Members
  1. jpmalpas Oct 17, 2016

    Posts
    4
    Likes
    0
    Good day Guys. Just wanted ask something, recently bought a used Omega Speedy 3513.30. Me and the seller agreed to have it authenticated at a shop to determine if it's authentic before I buy it. The shop told us that everything is good and they also looked at the inside/ movement of the watch. Upon arriving Home, I checked the crystal of the watch and noticed that the AR Coating was on the outside while the Official Omega website suggests that it should be on the inside so my question is, is it common? I was thinking that maybe from the 1st few years that they have made this particular model they used to put the ar coating on the outside then switched it on the inside on the new ones but still same ref/ model number. Thanks for the insights!
     
  2. Foo2rama Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can. Oct 17, 2016

    Posts
    17,100
    Likes
    25,345
    How are you determining it's on the outside?
     
  3. jpmalpas Oct 17, 2016

    Posts
    4
    Likes
    0
    Tried scratching it on purpose. Some told me that same models could have slight differences depending on the year it was made. My watch's serial number starts with 57xxxxxx so I'm assuming that this was an earlier release of this kind of model. Your thoughts Sir? You guys have any idea when did Omega started putting their AR Coating on the inside? Thanks!
     
  4. padders Oooo subtitles! Oct 17, 2016

    Posts
    8,988
    Likes
    13,936
    Cant speak for that exact model but you will find plenty of watches inc Omegas which are double coated ie inside and out. My 2201.50 is like this. This is fine until the outer coating gets scratched but it can be removed by polywatch anyway. I think you were a bit rash in scratching it on purpose! What next? Test the crystal is actually sapphire with a hammer? You break it you bought it.
     
  5. Foo2rama Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can. Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    17,100
    Likes
    25,345
    I'm still not sure how you test it by scratching it.
     
  6. jpmalpas Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    4
    Likes
    0
    Ar coating has a lot of scratches anyways so I did not bother to try to scratch it on my own. I'll just bring the watch to the expert to have it removed completely.
     
  7. padders Oooo subtitles! Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    8,988
    Likes
    13,936
    That isn't what you said above hence our slightly bemused responses!
     
  8. dialstatic Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    924
    Likes
    1,773
    I have an omega 3513.50 (a.k.a. 375.0083) which is basically the same watch with a different dial, and it is double coated inside and out. The Omga database says it's supposed to be that way: http://www.omegawatches.com/planet-omega/heritage/vintage-details/14657/

    It says: "Scratch-resistant sapphire (anti-reflective on both sides)"

    I wouldn't be worried. Apparently, these don't have an Omega logo in the center of the glass (...whose absence could otherwise be a tell) either.

    Be careful when removing it. On mine, the previous owner tried this probably through machinated polishing, and it scoffed the inner edge of the tachy ring a little.
     
  9. jpmalpas Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    4
    Likes
    0
    Thanks for the response Sir, checked the 3513.50 database and it says "Anti Reflective Treatment inside". Is this your exact piece? So yours have coating inside and out?

    http://www.omegawatches.com/watches/speedmaster/date/35135000/
     
  10. padders Oooo subtitles! Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    8,988
    Likes
    13,936
    Why does it worry you so? You know the watch is genuine so I can't see what there is to fret about.
     
  11. dialstatic Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    924
    Likes
    1,773
    Heh, the official Omega vintage database apparently disagrees with the official Omega website on that one. I can imagine they stopped coating the outside at some point in time (just a guess).

    But yes, mine has coating on the outside, too. I know this, because the previous owner apparently tried to remove it, but failed to do so at the edges of the crystal.
     
  12. lando Oct 18, 2016

    Posts
    649
    Likes
    1,179
    Probably because all the owners were and are trying to get rid of it anyway... ;)
     
    dialstatic likes this.