Ladies and Gents, Long-time lurker who finally made the jump to a member. First of all, thanks so much for all of the great info that's on the site. Getting right to it, I'm negotiating a purchase of the above piece on eBay (it's actually for my dad; he had an original '67, but sold it to help pay for his wedding a decade in the 1970s). Any thoughts on its quality and collectability are appreciated. FWIW, I've been told by the seller that the case is completely unpolished and everything is completely original. Movement photos are to come (the seller is emailing them to me). It's on a 1039 bracelet. Thanks in advance!
Welcome Dr! I'm not a fan of Chrono24 generally. Meaning negotiate carefully ... Looks to me that - Dial generally looks good & attractive; combined with bezel it's nice. Crown seems to be a replacement and not the original skinny logo type; Pushers seem too big; Case back also seems worn down I would tend to think the dial and pushers were changed on a service but if seller is claiming all original, get that into your conversation, whether this serviced or not. It picks holes in the originality claim as various parts tend to be changed in a service if the owner doesn't specify. Assume it's not all original. Some are usually ok with that but the size looks wrong. To my eye. Movement photos should be seen/reviewed before any agreement to buy. You can't know what you're negotiating if movement is rusty, busted, a Seamaster replacement, etc., .... Get good photos to review. There are great examples here on OF you can view. Other members may chime in after some rest from the, um .... new year festivities, shall we say. No need to rush Good luck!
Thanks so much, John! I'm relieved to hear that you're a little concerned regarding the pushers; they looked a bit large to my (admittedly somewhat naive) eyes as well. Good call on the crown too. Definitely agree on the need for movement photos; I'll post 'em when they're received. I'm definitely looking for an original (or as close to it as possible), since it's such a nostalgic piece for my dad. I've only got a few old photos of him wearing his original '67 to go on, so additional learned opinions are welcomed. This one caught my eye due to the relatively original-appearing (not obviously over-lumed/lousily-restored) dial. Happy New Year to all!
I should also add that it takes time to develop an eye for these so here's some more help. It's by a more experienced OF member @Spacefruit ---> speedmaster101.com Happy hunting & again, welcome to OF.
"I would tend to think the dial and pushers were changed on a service..............................." I think you meant crown and pushers? Just a side note. As JS states, crown and pushers are frequently changed during servicing, as the waterproof seals on these cannot be replaced without changing the part. Not a big deal re originality, since correct size pushers are not $$$ and original spec crowns are no longer available. At least this shows evidence of at least one service . Ask questions on the bracelet. Should be a 67 or 68 for a 67 watch. Total length? Are all stretch links present and working? Great present for your Dad. Lovely thought.
Welcome to the forum, I cant recommend this place or its members highly enough as I have just went through the uncertainty of buying a vintage Speedmaster and a few members on here were excellent in answering me silly questions! Speedmaster101 is an excellent site also.
Just as a side note, do you know for a fact your dads original watch was a '67 or are you just assuming this as he bought it in 1967? If so it may well be a '65/66. I guess there's no way of finding out if you don't already know, but it may allow you to broaden your search.
Thanks so much for all of your input, chaps. A bit more background: My father is certain that his was a '67, since that year referenced the calendar year in which he turned 21. However, he's relatively convinced that his dial was replaced early on due to water damage (he lived in Seattle for a time, and was/is an avid outdoorsman). He thinks that his dial was painted rather than applied; I'm assuming, then, that his was indeed replaced. After a long look at the above piece, I can't tell if the Omega logo is applied (insinuating a possibly original dial) or painted. Any thoughts? Again, thanks a ton! PS: Keeping my eye on the "recommended eBay watches for sale" thread as well. Thanks so much for all of the knowledge!
Sorry, what I meant was, a good proportion of the Speedmasters sold in 1967 were actually '65/66 models, as these watches were produced, transported abroad, and perhaps sat with dealers for several months prior to sale. For instance my 105.003-65 was actually sold in 1967. So, if your dad knows for sure he bought it in 67 but has no other idea of the model, it could be an earlier one. I guess I'm just saying that personally I wouldn't be too hell bent on it being a 67 myself and I'd consider a66 and even a 65. The pics, you shared show an applied dial which is correct for this model.
yes, applied logo on the watch you are looking at - the silver finish of the applied logo looks dark in the shadow of the chrono second hand. Would show up as white if it was a painted logo
I was also considering this example. For Chrono24, the price is especially attractive given that it comes with original papers. I asked Spacefruit about the dial, and I agreed with him that it looked "unnatural," like it had been repainted to look artificially aged, but these much higher-res pictures are more revealing --the dial and hands actually look quite nice and are extraordinarily even and matched.
Just as a quick update, I've had a very pleasant back-and-forth with the seller, who seems quite knowledgeable regarding the piece. However, in the most recent message (and as a reply to my second request to see movement photos) the seller said that they would "send photos of the movement only next Monday if (I) agree to purchase." Classic. (Note: Edited for grammar).
Another quick question for you gents: What do we think of this example from analog/shift? It appears to be a "true" (i e, not a "transitional") '69. However, I'm worried about the originality of the seconds hand. Again, I've requested movement photos, and will post when they're receiced. I'm still on the hunt for a '67 for my dad; however, I'm also looking for myself now. Need to spend the holiday bonus. Damn you guys - you've given me the bug now too... Cheers!
"send photos of the movement only next Monday if (I) agree to purchase." Run away from someone like that IMO
the white colour of the hands themself can turn to this egg shell colour, but the lume does not get that yellowish
Seriously, no one? It looks as if you can see through and not just a dark spot on the hands as the lines underneath are different in both pictures... Maybe I've been staring at a screen for too long today hehehehe