I have recently become interested in the earlier Omega watches (pre 40s), however the research I have done on them has not turned up an awful lot, especially on these movements. However, I know there are a couple of esteemed members here who may have the answers.

I have seen it said that "differences not known between redesigns T1...T3" on the Ranfft website, is this the case?

My second question is about two watches I have, both with a 23.7 movement (albeit finished differently). The T2's serial number is later than the T3's serial. This seems very odd to me, is this a known thing? As the bridge with the serial number on seems to be the same, is this just a case of using up previously manufactured parts?

As for the watches, both have dial issues unfortunatley, but the price I paid reflected this. It would also be great if anyone knew the references of these models. I have had a look through the small number of catalogue scans I have, and cant seem to spot either.

Thanks very much for your help, Lucas.

 

Lucas,

there are some differences for sure.

Some which can be seen at first sight:

1) Geneva stripes vs. smooth surface of the bridges
2) different finish of the ratchet and crown wheels

And I am pretty sure there are other (technical) differences - if I recall correctly the balance might be different (length of the balance staff).

best to ask Al@Archer for these technical details

best regards
Erich

 

Erich,

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I did notice the different finishing, but I was under the impression that it was done ad hoc on all the movements from t1-t3. Clearly this is incorrect, and very helpful in identifying the different movements. And thanks for the suggestion of @Archer, I didn't realise his encyclopaedic knowledge reached so far back as these movements.

Lucas

 

Hello Lucasssssss,

The cases of the two watches you show have hallmarks/marks which show that each was imported into UK. The ‘GS’ mark is the sponsor George Stockwell. You can read more on David Boettcher’s excellent website:
http://www.vintagewatchstraps.com/importmarks.php#sponsorsmark

This means that the watches would not be traceable through Omega (who for this period recorded things according to case number). So the movements were made by Omega and exported to UK. That might also complicate the sequencing of numbers – but in those days movement (and case) numbers were often out of sequence.

To complicate things more, the 23.7 was produced from 1918 for nearly 20 years, the early version made in Geneva and then moving to Bienne in 1921.

To refer in more detail to differences between transformations, this would be a deep study – do you really want to do this?! Easier (à la Ranfft) to say ‘differences not known’! But actually the differences would be evident from the parts manuals. The original 23.7 and T1 are shown in parts manual GF239 (from 1926) and the T2 and T3 in GF494 (I think 1936). In fact there were not so many differences between T1 and T2 (but between the others there were many).

There were all sorts of differences. Do you really need to know? Were you thinking of ordering parts?!

Just as an example, here’s an extract from GF239 which shows the differences between the original and the T1 (but the T1 here has a much earlier movement number!):


The following two images show just a couple of the (many) differences in parts.




I appreciate that you are asking about differences between the T2 and T3. If you really want to study this, you’ll need to get copies of GF239 and GF494 and go into great detail.

Or you could follow the Ranfft example…

Please come back if I can help more (but I don’t want to study the 23.7!).
Tom

 

Lucas, as a further comment, since you ask about references for your two watches…

Because your watches were ‘national’ productions (UK, as I described above), I don’t think you’ll find Omega references. The Omega work stopped when they dispatched the movements to UK.

 

Thank you Tom, this is a compelling read. My interest in these was piqued by my research into the movements, however this interest is academic rather than a need for movement parts. If the chance arose, I would be interested in studying these movements further, however I know for a fact my watchmaking skills are not up to scratch to disassemble them and take notes. I shall have to search for the GF239 and GF494 you mention, this seems to be a good start.

As for your further comment, this makes complete sense. After reading David Boettcher’s website, it sheds some light on the dates of these Omegas through the extensive hall mark guidance. Following this it seems that the gold T3 case was imported to the UK by GS (as you describe) through the London Assay Office in 1919. The T2 silver case was imported also by GS through London in 1926. A difference of at lest 7 years (at most almost 9). It is of course possible that the that the T3 case was imported and then when sent back to Switzerland was furnished with a T3 movement instead of a T2, but this does not explain the difference in serial.

Either way, I expect we shall never know. If you have any more guidance on these movements, I would be very interested to hear your thaughts. If anyone is reading this with a 23.7 in their collection, I would be interested in seeing the case, movement and any hallmarks associated with it, to try and build up some kind of picture.

Lucas

 

After a brief email conversation with David, it appears I have had the date number reversed, and it is a P rather than a D. This dates the case import to 1930 rather than my previous assessment of 1919. Therefore as it stands; the date of the case of the silver watch is 26-27', the t2 movement serial dates it to about 34'. The gold case dates to 30-31 with the t3 movement serial dating it to about 32'.

It seems surprising the length of time between the t2 movement case import and movement. The plot thickens I suppose.

Lucas

 

Lucas, I can only recommend that you don’t rely too much on the assumed sequencing of movement numbers. Particularly at this period, the Omega movement numbers were definitely NOT in sequence. There were various reasons for this – for example, some ‘batches’ of movements were allocated numbers out of sequence.

I have a 23.7 T2 movement from 1929 with a number 738****. I have a 26.5 movement from 1930 with the number 765****.

I have to ask again whether it’s important to you. I hope not because without an Omega case (and therefore case number) I doubt that you will ever know. Just enjoy the watches! The 23.7 had a long history.

 

Tom, thank you for the advice about the serial numbers, it was just a point of interest to me rather than a point of importance. Like you recommend I shall sit back and enjoy the watches (and perhaps do some research should the chance present itself).

Lucas