Are these dials correct?

cicindela · Nov 17, 2014

I would agree with Mike here. Another factor to consider in evaluating these, is that these dials were often printed in stages with various additions and subtractions in the script, depending on both the need, market, and whims of production. This led to a bit of variation back then that was neither planned nor concerning.

Here are two 14311, both have correct movements and casebacks and date appropriate production, yet the script is different.
Nevertheless both are unquestionably legit 14311

$T2eC16NHJIYE9qUcM7rHBRWL7!iIGw~~60_57.JPG

MSNWatch · Nov 17, 2014

And case ref. 2648 is I believe the one case reference with the largest variety of dial styles of any vintage omega model - almost as if omega was "experimenting" to finally come up with a more standardized dial design.

Mathlar · Nov 17, 2014

I buy into that argument - we see similar experimentation in the Seamaster jumbo 2657/2494 models. Despite being one of the most uncommon Seamaster references, the variety in the dial and font styles is huge... big happy-feet Omega logos; regular Omega logos; a variety of fonts seen nowhere else, guilloche in a variety of patterns...

MSNWatch
And case ref. 2648 is I believe the one case reference with the largest variety of dial styles of any vintage omega model - almost as if omega was "experimenting" to finally come up with a more standardized dial design.

MSNWatch · Nov 17, 2014

Mathlar
I buy into that argument - we see similar experimentation in the Seamaster jumbo 2657/2494 models. Despite being one of the most uncommon Seamaster references, the variety in the dial and font styles is huge... big happy-feet Omega logos; regular Omega logos; a variety of fonts seen nowhere else, guilloche in a variety of patterns...

Yes, I have 4 of the 2494 reference all with different dial designs and 4 different case metal compositions!
And of the 6 ref. 2648 constellations that I own, all 6 have different dial designs and this one is a 14k Rose Gold case - when have you ever seen a constellation with a 14k (not 18k) rose gold case? - and it's a swiss case not french production or south american production.

gatorcpa · Nov 17, 2014

I was going to raise the possibility of the Ref. 14311, but felt that since this case had the observatory, that this argument was somewhat of a "red herring" that really didn't prove anything with respect to this particular piece.

Here are some older details about a Ref. 14311 in a pre-OF post:

http://omega.watchprosite.com/?show=forumpostf&fi=677&pi=3367116&ti=548176&s=0

You'll note a few familiar names in that one. 😉 One last point on the Ref. 14311. To my knowledge, all case references of early Globemasters had the US import mark of "OXG" somewhere on the movement. If a Ref. 14311 dial doesn't have the import mark or the star, then I would consider it an Omega Chronometre, not a Globemaster or Constellation. Not that there's a large population of these to classify. 😁

I would be interested in seeing if the diameter of the piece is equal to other Ref. 2648 Constellations or Globemasters, given the gold case spacer that is there. Some of the watches included in Desmond's article entitled "Blue Steel SC Constellations" seem to be from the same production run, but there is no spacer ring present. That's a bit odd to me.

http://users.tpg.com.au/mondodec//Bluesteel SC.pdf

I do not discount MSN's theory on this being a early Constellation. There is certainly precedent for no-name dials at that time in Omega history. However, the fact that other elements of the Constellation styling are missing concern me as well. I have always thought that the dial is 100% Omega.

It's just which Omega that I'm not sure about.
gatorcpa

aga79 · Nov 17, 2014

hmm...
Nice dials, if I were U I'll take it both..
All I ever care, everything is the original OMEGA
just do some homeworks to make it correct

mondodec · Nov 17, 2014

Whatever is advanced we have to accept the conjectural aspect of the discussion. There is not, so far, a definitive answer to be had on this subject . That is why I offered an explanation rather than anything more certain. I've been collecting watches since 1979 and I have never seen this configuration, and while that may be a statement about my life experience I would suggest that if it ain't got a star it ain't a Constellation dial. It could be a 2648, who knows?, but that doesn't make it a Constellation.

The very first Constellation launch Ads showed the star, and comparing Geoff Chiang's 2648 serials we know that both pieces came out about the same time, with the example being discussed produced marginally later. Case serials on the Chiang examples are slightly later than the example under discussion, which would lead me to think that it may possibly be a 2648 but not a Constellation, but the spacer is still an unresolved issue and it worries me as that is, from memory, a first too. The case back has little depth as opposed to the deeper bowl-like case backs of other 2648s. In fact it looks a lot like a 2500 case back designed to house a 30.10 calibre.

I proposed that it may have been from a 14311 as I have seen that style of dial on 14311s before, or it could be from one of the many iterations of Chronometers that Omega was pumping out in the very early 1950s to meet demand for this type of watch, but I am far from Convinced that it is a Constellation.

Cheers

Desmond

MSNWatch · Nov 17, 2014

mondodec
Whatever is advanced we have to accept the conjectural aspect of the discussion. There is not, so far, a definitive answer to be had on this subject . That is why I offered an explanation rather than anything more certain. I've been collecting watches since 1979 and I have never seen this configuration, and while that may be a statement about my life experience I would suggest that if it ain't got a star it ain't a Constellation dial. It could be a 2648, who knows?, but that doesn't make it a Constellation.

The very first Constellation launch Ads showed the star, and comparing Geoff Chiang's 2648 serials we know that both pieces came out about the same time, with the example being discussed produced marginally later. Case serials on the Chiang examples are slightly later than the example under discussion, which would lead me to think that it may possibly be a 2648 but not a Constellation, but the spacer is still an unresolved issue and it worries me as that is, from memory, a first too. The case back has little depth as opposed to the deeper bowl-like case backs of other 2648s. In fact it looks a lot like a 2500 case back designed to house a 30.10 calibre.

I proposed that it may have been from a 14311 as I have seen that style of dial on 14311s before, or it could be from one of the many iterations of Chronometers that Omega was pumping out in the very early 1950s to meet demand for this type of watch, but I am far from Convinced that it is a Constellation.

Cheers

Desmond

Appreciate a photo of a similar dial from a 14311 if you have it as I haven't seen one quite like this. And this example possibly predates Chiang's watches based on the inner caseback reference number rather than the movement serials.

gatorcpa · Nov 17, 2014

MSNWatch
Appreciate a photo of a similar dial from a 14311 if you have it as I haven't seen one quite like this.

Neither have I. But I've only seen a couple online with original dials and both of them are pictured above.

MSNWatch
And this example possibly predates Chiang's watches based on the inner caseback reference number rather than the movement serials.

Inner caseback serial is before Mr. Chiang's examples, but the movement serial number is in between the two.

Not sure if this means everything or nothing.
gatorcpa

pitpro · Nov 17, 2014

Here is another with the spacer. Sorry, I don't have a picture of the caseback.
But I have it filed under 2648 for what that's worth.

12435920 cal. 352 RG-1 1st Constellation.jpg

12435920 cal. 352 RG-1 1st Constellation-2.jpg

12435920 cal. 352 RG-1 1st Constellation-3.jpg

X350 XJR · Nov 17, 2014

Another 14311 similar to Steve's.

MSNWatch · Nov 17, 2014

The only issue with the watch in question is did the dial - which is an aged original omega dial with rose gold markers - originally come with this case or was it taken from another watch and placed in this case. The case, hands, movement, and crown IMO opinion are correct. I think it's all correct including the dial while others don't.

But consider this - how difficult is it to find an original 29.5mm bumper chronometre dial matching the age of the rest of the watch with rose gold markers? Does anyone even have a photo of this same dial in any other reference? It would be easier to find an original black piepan dial with white gold arrowhead markers and we know how difficult those are to locate.

gatorcpa · Nov 17, 2014

MSNWatch
It would be easier to find an original black piepan dial with white gold arrowhead markers and we know how difficult those are to locate.

I absolutely agree. However, the issue I have is more of provenance and uniqueness. It is highly unlikely that we could get Omega to weigh in on the "birthday" of the movement and whether it was placed in this case originally. So provenance (at least from Omega) is pretty much out of the question.

When a collectible is unique, as this combination might very well be, the burden of proof falls on the seller to show originality. The object cannot prove itself. I would love to be able to help, but I don't think I'll ever see another combination like this.

The best I can do is say this combination is plausible.
gatorcpa

tamura · Oct 21, 2015

After a year still in auction, I bought the "conmaster" last weekend.Here's what I got.
A strange dial - completely matte and very thin printed. Could be a redial. what do you think?

Case with scratches all over but very sharp.

A nice Medallion

Caseback

And a clean movement.

It is maybe not a collectible watch but I like it.😀

TNTwatch · Oct 22, 2015

tamura
After a year still in auction, I bought the "conmaster" last weekend.Here's what I got.
A strange dial - completely matte and very thin printed. Could be a redial. what do you think?

Case with scratches all over but very sharp.

A nice Medallion

Caseback

And a clean movement.

It is maybe not a collectible watch but I like it.😀

I think it was sold once before and came back after awhile. I've seen that dial style on a few other non-chronometer Seamasters, and the same hour index style once on a Constellation 2652. A clean dial for a bumper Connie is quite hard to find, or I'd have got this long time ago. 😀

ulackfocus · Oct 22, 2015

It might be a very good redial, my only evidence backing this argument being the SWISS MADE spacing. Not much to stand on though, other than the rest of the watch is pure Constellation.

Hijak · Oct 22, 2015

Fantastic thread!👍

spoynya

tamura · Oct 22, 2015

Finally I made a seamaster out of it.😀
Case 2577

ulackfocus · Oct 22, 2015

So whatcha gonna do with the rest of the parts?

tamura · Oct 22, 2015

U ulackfocus
So whatcha gonna do with the rest of the parts?

Looking for a conny 2652 in a totally overpolished case.😀

Are these dials correct?

cicindela

MSNWatch

Mathlar

MSNWatch

gatorcpa

aga79

mondodec

MSNWatch

gatorcpa

pitpro

X350 XJR

MSNWatch

gatorcpa

tamura

TNTwatch

ulackfocus

Hijak

tamura

ulackfocus

tamura

Similar threads

Omega Seamasters; Are these in good condition/which is better?

How fake are these listings on ebay?

What are these markings on Omega Mesh clasps?

[Need help] Are these fake or real ?

What hands are these on my Apollo 11 Mod?

Are these legitimate watches / dials