Chronostop question - 146.009 vs 146.010

[amcclell]

Hi Everyone, I have a 1968 Chronostop with an extract that confirms the movement was sold in a 146.010 reference. This watch should be a driver configuration with 12 o'clock oriented towards the crown and pusher. The watch currently presents as a non-driver dial orientation, which was the 146.009 reference.

Was this a simple conversion that was done simply by rotating the original dial 90 degrees on the movement or would the dial need to be replaced to accomplish this? I'm hoping that one of our more tech-savvy members can help with this. The person I purchased this from had purchased the watch from a retired watchmaker, who worked at an Omega AD.

I imagine that somewhere along the line, an owner preferred the standard dial configuration but I may restore it back to the driver configuration when I have it serviced this year. Was this a common conversion?

 

[JwRosenthal]

🍿

 

[Archer]

The dials for the 1460009 and 1460010 are different. So the dial was either replaced with a different dial, or the dial feet were cut off in order to use the dial in a different orientation.

 

[amcclell]

Much appreciated, Al. Thanks

Is cutting the feet problematic and a replacement dial my best option? Either way, I'll be getting it serviced.

 

[Archer]

If the dial feet were cut off, then you would need to find out how the dial was attached. If the feet were soldered back on somehow without damaging the front surface of the dial, you are good to keep using it in the current orientation. If the dial feet were not put back on, then they may have used dials dots (2 sided tape) to hold the dial in place.

How you proceed depends on:

1 - Was the dial modified?
2 - If yes, how was it modified?
3 - What is your intent?

 

[amcclell]

Thanks, this is extremely helpful. I will wait until it goes in for service and make my decision once I know how it was converted.

 

[JACK G]

I have one of these bought new in 1971. The inside case back is stamped with both numbers as it was shared with the two references.

Internet pic below illustrates this..........................

 

[amcclell]

Thanks Jack, I will wait and see what is found when it goes in for service. If nothing has been done to the dial feet, I will probably leave it as is.

 

[Archer]

JACK G

I have one of these bought new in 1971. The inside case back is stamped with both numbers as it was shared with the two references.

Internet pic below illustrates this..........................

They are certainly not all like this. Older photo that I had to enlarge and crop, but clearly only has 146.010 inside...