View attachment 227856 Brought this today on ebay...any info/advice...any idea what the numbers digits mean on the back...
thanks in advace

 

sorry about the multiple photos

 

The number on the back is the case serial number

 

Also, judging by the serial number on the movement it should date to late 30s early 40s. Maybe 1939-1942 or so... roughly.

 

The dial looks repainted, doesn't it?.

 

Hmm, I think it's a possibility. If it has, it's been redialed quite a long time ago, probably.

 

yes i think so too...are the hands original...

 

I think they very well could and should be. All 3 match up as far as color and wear. The size is good and the design seems to belong to that period of time. Haven't seen such a watch with that hour hand though. You usually get to see it on pocket watches but it's probably original. It's interesting to see that they put a smaller movement with a spacer inside. Often they were found on ladies watches and rectangle/tank watches but you'll find them in men's watches as well.
Here's a somewhat similar omega from 1939.

 

Similar??

The only similarity are the hands!

This has quite a different case design, has a pressure shut case back, so it is not waterproof like the watch of the OP

Has a circular 30 T2 SC movement inside and hence is with center second - the watch of the OP has sub sec., ....

 

I said somewhat.. Well actually I should have said it has a few similarities... which is actually one, the hands...
Also, the movement is some sort of T17 or related to T17 but I don't know which one...

 

No, it is not - it is a R 17.8 which is quite different to a T 17

I think you should not comment if you don´t know about... it is not necessary to comment each and every thread...

Don´t take my harsh words offensive - not intended! But it is annoying to read so much incorrect information in so many threads

 

I need to put "I think" or "In my opinion" at the beginning of the sentence a lot more than I do...

 

Ω cal R17.8, one of the earliest 3 Hz movements in regular production across the industry.

After re-staffing and poising the balance, my example is running better than anyone could reasonably expect for a septuagenarian.



+ 4 s/d, 297º amplitude, and -0.58 ms beat error, per the timing slip.

Cordially,

Art

 

This. All of this.

 

thank you for your comments and indepth knowledge

 

No, you need to stop posting "information" when you don't know the difference between your ass and a hole in the ground. Luckily, some members like Erich are polite to a fault as it shows in his post calling your information annoying.

Do you need EVERY MEMBER to get on your case? Or do we have to give you a time-out until you learn to knock it off?

 

I hope that's sarcasm, because if you look what the members with REAL experience and knowledge said you'll realize that you should NOT take anything dx009 says as correct. A broken clock is right twice a day - less so for dx009.

 

I think Mac_Omega's response was appropriate enough.

Though how many times is enough, dx009? Knowing when to hand out posts is more important than the posts themselves.