Community Stories

Cal. 320 with strange serial number manipulation...

alingher
Posts
38
Likes
24
Hi all,

I own this nice Omega cal. 320 watch, which I really like, except for the drill dents on the serial number:

omitit.JPG

omiwerk.JPG

I knew from the previous owner, that the original serial number was 12262925. Now, to my big surprise I have found on ebay another cal. 320 watch with nearly the same serial number (12262919) and the exact same marks on the serial number... Here it is even more obvious that it wasn't the intention to hide the serial number, as it is also engraved in the case back, as well as written on the paper that it comes with...:

s-l1600.jpg
(c) ebay.com

Does anyone have an explanation for this two drill dents? I mean, it looks like someone wanted to blur the serial numbers, but why should that be on both watches the same way? And why would he left out the serial number in the case back and kept the paper of the second watch?
I can only believe that there was another reason for these marks, but which?

Thanks for your help!
 
cristos71
Posts
7,577
Likes
34,760
What is the case reference? The movement doesn't look right to me. The "Omega Watch co. Seventeen Jewels" text stamping on the bridge looks off as does the "320" stamping ( I'm not sure when Omega changed the movement 'name' to 320 from 27 Chro T1 ) Also the drilled serial numbers raise grave doubts in my mind.

If you have a look as the placement of the serial number stamping on a Tissot movement and compare it to the stamping on an Omega watch you will find the Tissot number is stamped more to the right of the plate, as can be seen in the stamping of both of these examples above.

There are two drill marks, as if to imply that two numbers have been removed. This I doubt, I think one number ( a "1" ) has been removed and this would give a serial of 1262925 for the OP's watch and 1262919 for the other example. This would lead me to believe these are both re-badged and bodged Tissot movements dating from 1942.
 
tissot_manufacturing_dates.jpg
alingher
Posts
38
Likes
24
Thank you both for the input!

Tissot movements? Yes, there could be something, but it would be quite surprising to find two of them with such close serial numbers. The reference number is 2465. Which in my books should be ok for the serial number. Also the 27Chro T1 was only introduced in 1942 and renamed "320" in 1949. Were there already Tissot 27-41 in 1942?
 
cristos71
Posts
7,577
Likes
34,760
alingher alingher
Tissot movements? Yes, there could be something, but it would be quite surprising to find two of them with such close serial numbers

Coincidence maybe, but two wrongs don't make a right, do you have a better explanation for the weird stamping/bridges/drilling/serial number location on both these watches?

alingher alingher
The reference number is 2465. Which in my books should be ok for the serial number

I don't understand your point, for which serial number would the 2465 reference be OK for?

alingher alingher
Also the 27Chro T1 was only introduced in 1942 and renamed "320" in 1949. Were there already Tissot 27-41 in 1942?

As they are derived from the same Lemania movement I would assume so, but I'm not certain. Some research for yourself perhaps?

By the way are you the seller of this watch?

http://www.vintage-oyster.com/epage...hops/es706384/Products/OM170865&ClassicView=1
 
cristos71
Posts
7,577
Likes
34,760
From the seller's site.....

1950s_Omega_Chronograph_18k_cal._320_-_Vintage-Oyster_-_2018-09-30_12.43.57.png 1950s_Omega_Chronograph_18k_cal._320_-_Vintage-Oyster_-_2018-09-30_12.41.07.png


The case has 18kt gold hallmarks on the outside, on the inside the ref number is extremely light and the Omega hallmarks look laser printed and not as I would expect for a case from the 1940's. Together with inner dust cover and nodules for the attachment of female spring bars it is very clear that this isn't an original Omega case, more like an 18kt 'onion skin' case for a Chronograph Suisse or something like that.
 
Tony C.
Posts
7,799
Likes
27,114
As @cristos71 suggests, that Omega signature on the inside of the casebook is a fraud.
 
S.H.
Posts
1,611
Likes
3,836
cristos71 cristos71
From the seller's site.....


The case has 18kt gold hallmarks on the outside, on the inside the ref number is extremely light and the Omega hallmarks look laser printed and not as I would expect for a case from the 1940's. Together with inner dust cover and nodules for the attachment of female spring bars it is very clear that this isn't an original Omega case, more like an 18kt 'onion skin' case for a Chronograph Suisse or something like that.

I would agree, even if I can't say much on the Omega markings, me not being an Omega expert. The case with the "metal" rings really looks like a 1940s chronograph suisse generic case. Most are hollow (0.3mm thick for the one I have on my bench currently) and the net gold weight is very low, around 6g. Maybe ask the owner about the actual gold weight? And notice the second case screw at 4 O clock, it does look iffy to me. Check the casing diameter of a 321 against any landeron, valjoux, venus, ... that could have been a previous host of the case. Also, the dial could be generic, the omega stamp may have been added later and dial feet reallocated.

For a price of 3870€ we really could use some more info.

EDIT:

Another thing: here is a blowup of one of the sellers pictures:

omiwerk.JPG


Is it me being paranoid, are my eyes tired? Is the midcase even gold? It could look like plating loss...
Edited:
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

Romega

Vintage Seamaster, cal 501, with strange serialnumber

Romega Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Romega
Romega
Posts
0
Views
1K
seikoskar

Speedmaster with strange serial number

seikoskar Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Northernman
Northernman
Posts
84
Views
22K