Canceled Extract of Archives

Posts
1,849
Likes
3,574
Tried 25.05M to 25.95M and it matches 145.012-67...
That’s just a date range estimate, nothing to prove a link to a speedmaster. Fwiw my money is on the digit being a ‘6.’
 
Posts
140
Likes
167
I finally got my watch opened and had a close look with a magnifier. I could clearly see an 8 which means a 25.8M movement.
I tried to take a macro picture that you can see below.


According to @speedy4ever (MWO author) 25.8M can't be a caliber 321. So what to conclude? Fake caliber ? 😕
 
Posts
13
Likes
0
Numbers seems strange and different from the type used on my 321 caliber 24.951.XXX...
Is it usual to observe different fonts according to caliber parts furnishes ?
 
Posts
20,813
Likes
47,713
Maybe it's a 0 but the movement is not for a Speedmaster.
[Edit: I think it's an 8.]
 
Posts
6,593
Likes
11,287
And while this is an interesting exercise in visual acuity it seems that it is an incorrect serial for the speedmaster in question no matter what the number is.
 
Posts
140
Likes
167
Seamaster chrono ?
This is actually what I try to know : for which Omega models it could fit if not Speedmaster, so at least it's a correct period and not fake.
 
Posts
435
Likes
1,378
Well, unfortunately your research will end here. At least with the help of omega. As long as you do not send a picture of the correct watch referring to the serial to Omega, they will not issue you with an extract.
 
Posts
140
Likes
167
Well, unfortunately your research will end here. At least with the help of omega. As long as you do not send a picture of the correct watch referring to the serial to Omega, they will not issue you with an extract.
Agreed.
I wonder if I should try to find why I have 25.8m in my 145.012-67 or just ask for a refund or finally it is not a big deal as it seems to be period correct.
 
Posts
7,429
Likes
34,232
Agreed.
I wonder if I should try to find why I have 25.8m in my 145.012-67 or just ask for a refund or finally it is not a big deal as it seems to be period correct.

It's a very big deal, these aren't watches of a couple hundred euros. I'd seriously advise you to get a refund ASAP if that is possible. If the dealer is as 'trusted' as you say, then he shouldn't have a problem doing what's right, especially if it's a recent purchase.

There are loads of correct 145.012's out there and trying to sell this one down the line will not be easy if you want to see anything like your purchase price back again.

Of course if this issue was priced in when you bought it (?) then it's another story
 
Posts
4,113
Likes
16,307
There have been blank bridges circulating lately. I am afraid that could be one of them reengraved with whatever serial... 🙁 I don’t like the way those numbers have been placed there.
 
Posts
2,483
Likes
2,854
Maybe it received a replacement bridge from a 320 cal? - Does the serial match a 320 cal watch?

But yeah, probably best to ask for a refund
 
Posts
140
Likes
167
kov kov
There have been blank bridges circulating lately. I am afraid that could be one of them reengraved with whatever serial... 🙁 I don’t like the way those numbers have been placed there.
The guy who would have done that on my watch must then be stupid as he could at least have chosen a correct serial number...😒
 
Posts
140
Likes
167
It's a very big deal, these aren't watches of a couple hundred euros. I'd seriously advise you to get a refund ASAP if that is possible. If the dealer is as 'trusted' as you say, then he shouldn't have a problem doing what's right, especially if it's a recent purchase.

There are loads of correct 145.012's out there and trying to sell this one down the line will not be easy if you want to see anything like your purchase price back again.

Of course if this issue was priced in when you bought it (?) then it's another story

I paid a normal (higher than average) price for the watch, thanks to it general condition. See below :