BOR for 167.005 Constellation Advice

AULLRICH · Oct 1, 2017

Hi - I recently just purchased a 1964 Connie ref. 168.004 with 551 movement and 24 Jewels and dogged legs (photos below) and am looking for the correct Beads of Rice bracelet. This is a wedding gift which is coming up soon (< 2 weeks now!), so trying to find it as quickly as possible (though I realize that might be a challenge).

I've done research but can't seem to pinpoint the exact body and end links I need, and don't want to buy the wrong thing. Does the 1037 with 570 end links work best? If so, I found this one on Ebay though...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/18mm-Genuin...195796?hash=item3d4971bd14:g:gQcAAOSwiu9ZxpZR

Thanks for any advice! Happy Sunday!

Noddyman · Oct 1, 2017

Not sure I can help with the bracelet but you do realise your watch is a 168.005 not a 168.004? They could well be the same end links but I wouldn't want you to get the wrong ones.

AULLRICH · Oct 1, 2017

Noddyman
Not sure I can help with the bracelet but you do realise your watch is a 168.005 not a 168.004? They could well be the same end links but I wouldn't want you to get the wrong ones.

Oh no I didn't! The person I bought it from said it was a 004. Maybe that's why I'm having a hard time finding what type of BOR I need for this watch.

Noddyman · Oct 1, 2017

... also IMO the beads of rice doesn't look so great with the dog legged lugs. Personal opinion of course. I took mine off and reverted to leather as it just didn't look right. Beautiful specimen BTW.

AULLRICH · Oct 1, 2017

Noddyman
... also IMO the beads of rice doesn't look so great with the dog legged lugs. Personal opinion of course. I took mine off and reverted to leather as it just didn't look right. Beautiful specimen BTW.

Thanks! Yea I like the leather look, but I've heard my fiance say he wants a SS bracelet, so I'd figured I'd get him one and then let him make the ultimate decision on which he prefers. Seems it's hard to come by these BORs though.

AULLRICH · Oct 1, 2017

AULLRICH
Oh no I didn't! The person I bought it from said it was a 004. Maybe that's why I'm having a hard time finding what type of BOR I need for this watch.

Newbie question, but what exactly is the difference between the 004 and 005, and how can you tell w/o taking the back case off? Thanks @Noddyman!

Noddyman · Oct 1, 2017

The 004 is slightly larger (from same era) and has a hidden crown.
Pic stolen from Google images as I don't have this ref (yet)

AULLRICH · Oct 1, 2017

Noddyman
The 004 is slightly larger (from same era) and has a hidden crown.
Pic stolen from Google images as I don't have this ref (yet)

Ah ok. I was told that I was buying a Jumbo Constellation. Sigh. Oh well, guess I need to go get the back case checked now just so I can be sure of exactly what I bought my fiance. Thanks!

Noddyman · Oct 1, 2017

The 'jumbo' is a 168.001 and these are few and far between with a case size about 37mm if I remember correctly. I wouldn't worry about taking the back off you definitely have a 168.005. This reference is one of the more desirable cases much more so than the 004. I am sure your fiancé will be well pleased with what you have there.

Noddyman · Oct 1, 2017

Sorry I need to correct myself, what you actually have is a 167.005.
168.005 is date version. 167.005 is no date version. Essentially the same watch but slightly different movements

ConElPueblo · Oct 1, 2017

If the seller stated that it was a different reference than what you got, you could claim your money back. Esp. as a claim of "jumbo" reference was apparently made. I can see that you got it from Fullywound, is that correct? He does have some odd claims...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Omega-27-CH...ae-1944-WWII-Pilots-Chronograph-/162656068421

natural age patina to the dial but this has done little to effect the legibility of this rather handsome omega and is importantly ALL Original and natural even patina now a rather handsome creamy ivory coloration with likely Original radium pencil hands. This is NOT a redial (Geiger pics on request)

🤦

ChrisN · Oct 1, 2017

I know who sold @AULLRICH this watch and it wasn't Fullywound. It wasn't me, either. That is an excellent example.

If there is any confusion about the model, it will be a genuine mistake with lots of similar models being discussed. Firstly, the size difference is not important and you can see this here. Seondly, the 168.005/167.005 is far more desirable and expensive in my opinion. The third digit 16x.005 just tells you that it has a date or not as noted above.

On the BOR front, I am not sure which are the correct end links but, I don't wear my 168.005 on a BOR as I don't think it would suit the dog leg lugs. If you find out, which are the correct links, let me know as I might have a BOR to suit for your special occasion - just looked at my two and they both have number 11 end links.

On the other hand, how about a very fine mesh? These are easily available new. Something like this? This has the wrong lug width as you would need 18 mm. I don't have one of these but I'm sure someone will have an opinion on which ones are nice.

Cheers, Chris

Kja · Oct 1, 2017

I believe you want the more square looking bor bracelet and number 70 endlinks to go with it. That will look incredible with this vintage of a dogleg.

Peemacgee · Oct 1, 2017

Well I like my 168.005 on a BOR.
no. 12 on no. 70 end links
Hope that helps
Very nice Connie BTW

Tom Dick · Oct 1, 2017

Hey all

The watch came from me, original Allison was considering the Jumbo I had for sale in the sales corner but after much discussion and deliberation she opted against that one as the dial had a too creamy patina in non natural light (which is where the jumbo confusion lies).

We spent many a message deliberating and I offered the example she bought up as a possible option for her (top girl by the way). The watch was taken in by me in PX and so I passed it on to Allison at exactly what it owed me (I actually lost out as I included a very nice mahogany box, the original buckle and shipping over the pond).

So, with the greatest respect gang before you dust off your pitch forks and light your torches remember this isn't TZ or watchuseek

Just to clarify here, Allison has me on speed dial, I don't EVER sell anything without selling my reputation and I work very hard to make sure people are both happy in the short term and satisfied in the long term.

Ive already discussed all of this with Allison via whatsapp.

Thanks Tom

Tom Dick · Oct 1, 2017

Just to close the loop on this one before I sign out and focus my energies elsewhere:

I've now sorted out a nos Rowi BoR for the OP gratis as an apology for the confusion over the reference, which will need adjusting but is a good option until she can find the right Omega band

Pahawi · Oct 1, 2017

Another 168.005 on BOR 😀

OP - great watch you bought 👍

AULLRICH · Oct 2, 2017

Hey Everyone - For some reason I wasn't getting alerts on these posts yesterday, and couldn't really check as I was sitting next to the fiancé figuring out seatings charts and all that lovely last minute wedding stuff. @Tom Dick, and all of you, have made jumping into the world of vintage Omega's much easier than when I first started doing this on my own a few months ago. He's been super communicative and helpful and I would recommend buying from (I would do it again if I had all the monies to throw at more vintage watches!). I love the watch, but more importantly, think the fiancé is going to flip when he sees it 😀.

Regarding the BOR, so it sounds like I need a 1037 or 1036 with no. 12? @Peemacgee, sorry (still trying to figure out the BOR lingo), but are no. 12 and no. 70 both end pieces? What body #(if that's the right term) should I be looking for?

I found a couple on ebay this morning that are way out of my budget, but just using as an example. Would these be correct options?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Authentic-O...562881?hash=item28399205c1:g:vK8AAOSwHHFY-NO9

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rare-1960s-Omega-Beads-of-rice-Omega-No-12-bracelet-18mm/182790133658?_trkparms=aid%3D888007%26algo%3DDISC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D47507%26meid%3D6fb4be967adf4098985956b31ff129e2%26pid%3D100009%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26sd%3D253174162475&_trksid=p2047675.c100009.m1982

Do these BORs seem relatively over priced, or is that just the going rate for them these days? Thanks for your continued help on this!

Kja · Oct 2, 2017

Not sure about price but those are both the rounded 5 row type, for your watch you want the 7 row with no. 70 endlinks. You can use that kind with your watch but its not correct and looks funny.

Peemacgee · Oct 2, 2017

Hi @AULLRICH
just to add to the confusion - I was referring to the No12 on the clasp not end links
the end links are No70 the bracelet is a 1037
as for price -they have risen recently and not many up for sale at the moment
bit more info for you to digest
https://omegaforums.net/threads/my-fair-lady-66-connie-pie-pan.63389/page-2#post-801817
https://omegaforums.net/threads/hel...eads-of-rice-bracelet-for-case-167-005.34661/

Good luck

BOR for 167.005 Constellation Advice

AULLRICH

Noddyman

AULLRICH

Noddyman

AULLRICH

AULLRICH

Noddyman

AULLRICH

Noddyman

Noddyman

ConElPueblo

ChrisN

Kja

Peemacgee

Tom Dick

Tom Dick

Pahawi

AULLRICH

Kja

Peemacgee

Similar threads

Normal holes in mainplate of 551 movement? (167.005 Constellation)

Thoughts on this potential 167.005 Constellation Purchase

2852 & 14393 & 14900/167.005 Constellation casebacks

Seeking help with a Omega 167.005 Constellation

Just Received 167.005 Constellation..Thoughts?

FS: 1962 Omega Constellation 167.005 cal 551