Community Stories

Assessing an Omega Speedmaster Ref. 145.022 from 1969

B
Posts
23
Likes
8
I recently lost out on this auction but I'm curious whether I should have bid more. speedmaster101.com seems to suggest this price is about right. I am new to vintage Speedmasters and would also like to know if I missed any obvious problems visible from the pictures. (Apart from the fact the chronograph doesn't seem to zero at 12.)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Omega-Speedmaster-Ref-145-022-from-1969-premoon-Cal-861-/262498285568?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK:MEDWX:IT&nma=true&si=k%2B47ON%2FPXJEyhwRHWkjTZtzq8GE%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc
Edited:
 
This website may earn commission from Ebay sales.
Steve1haggart
Posts
1,038
Likes
1,307
Hi Bitt3n,
watch went for an average price in today’s market IMHO. hands look to have been re-lumed to match the dial , as for the chronograph not resenting that could be an easy fix the person how fitted the hand may not have lined them up properly or there may be underlining problems with the watch. if you’re looking for a speedy try the forum the watches are honest as are the sellers .
 
Slevin kelevra
Posts
635
Likes
2,716
Doesn't look like a great example. Not bad but not great. Is that a step dial? No DON either.

Price wasn't bad, Movement looks clean but pushers etc look dirty and if it was going to be a daily wearer would likely need replaced.
 
kov
Posts
4,114
Likes
16,317
Was also lurking on this one. Decided not to bid and finally the price went higher than what I'd have offered for that.
 
B
Posts
23
Likes
8
Steve1haggart Steve1haggart
hands look to have been re-lumed to match the dial
That's something I didn't notice. Am I correct in understanding that it's the uniformity of the lume that suggests it was re-applied (no darker or lighter parts)?
 
Spacefruit
Posts
5,309
Likes
24,290
For me it's not a question of is it great or not - it clearly isn't great. But it is attractive.

It is a fair 145.022-69, with an incorrect bezel and in urgent need of a service.

The bezel is relatively easy, DN90, and the service is without problems if you life in uk.

The hour hand lume is not an issue for me. They look nice and that's what counts. And way better than SL hands. I might keep a pair of naturally aged hands nearby if I owned this watch, but honestly after all this is done I think it's a £4000 watch.

If you think I am wrong, and I may be, then show me another late 69 in attractive, correct serviced condition for similar money.
 
abrod520
Posts
12,111
Likes
40,268
@Spacefruit dial's wrong though, it's a MWO C3 from the late '70s / '80s - meaning you'd be looking at approx. US$500+ for a correct stepped dial. Not sure about those pushers & crown either - if you ask me, the only value in this one is in the caseback
 
Davidt
Posts
13,026
Likes
22,592
I'm not sure I believe that watch. The lume on the hands and dial just doesn't look naturally aged to me. Especially the hands which are bright white, yet somehow have very aged lume. Add this to the new service bezel, and flat dial and I think it's been knocked together to look older than a lot of its part actually are.
 
cwindham
Posts
456
Likes
278
It looks like a service dial and without the correct DON bezel either. A service would run 850 here in the US so take that into consideration. A correct dial(if not stepped) would go for the cost of a service and then some. I would have passed as well.
 
abrod520
Posts
12,111
Likes
40,268
Davidt Davidt3449
I'm not sure I believe that watch. The lume on the hands and dial just doesn't look naturally aged to me. Especially the hands which are bright white, yet somehow have very aged lume. Add this to the new service bezel, and flat dial and I think it's been knocked together to look older than a lot of its part actually are.

My thoughts exactly - those C3 dials usually don't age like this. Most are only slightly yellowed
 
rcs914
Posts
2,510
Likes
3,732
I'm surprised no one has called out the bubbling on the dial near the indices for 8 and between 5 & 10.
 
cwindham
Posts
456
Likes
278
The 31,xxx,xxx serial dates it to 1972 so a 1969 is out of the question
 
Davidt
Posts
13,026
Likes
22,592
cwindham cwindham
The 31,xxx,xxx serial dates it to 1972 so a 1969 is out of the question

29/30/31,xxx xxx are all fine for -69's
 
cwindham
Posts
456
Likes
278
Davidt Davidt3449
29/30/31,xxx xxx are all fine for -69's

Chronomaddox is a bit off. I just checked speedmaster 101 and they have it as ok. My mistake
 
B
Posts
23
Likes
8
This thread has taught me that I would be well advised to stay away from the vintage market unless someone with a clue has thoroughly vetted the merchandise.
 
abrod520
Posts
12,111
Likes
40,268
B bitt3n
This thread has taught me that I would be well advised to stay away from the vintage market unless someone with a clue has thoroughly vetted the merchandise.

You just need to do your homework - and be patient! Getting into the vintage market is much more fun when the person with a clue is yourself
 
axl911
Posts
227
Likes
327
Isn't the crown also wrong for a 69? It should have a 24(?) step crown or something like that?
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

Amer

Vintage Omega speedmaster Ref.145.022 from 1969

Amer Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Amer
Amer
Posts
33
Views
3K
stefan

Stunning Omega Speedmaster Transitional 145.022 from 1968

stefan Private Watch Sales
stefan
stefan
Posts
8
Views
3K
stefan

Nos Omega Speedmaster Professional 145.022 from 1970's

stefan Watches For Sale
MSNWatch
MSNWatch
Posts
11
Views
4K