Your considered opinions are requested, as always . . . This is a Dennison 9k cased Omega cal 420 of ca 1954. I think the dial is probably original (?) but how about the hands. It looks to me as if the minute hand is too long, but I have no others for comparison. What do you think? Thanks for your input in advance. John
At first I thought you might be right, but then I Googled up "Omega Watch 420" and found these: Looks like you have the correct hands for this watch. gatorcpa
Wow, a minute hand that's longer than the second hand and extends beyond the minute/second track. Where's Hoi when you want him?
Gator, thank you very much. By the way, I know that the crown is a recent addition. This is very strange - it looks almost as if this movement (the 420) has its own specific handset where the minute hand is longer than the second hand. Normally you would say that this breaks all the rules. John
While we're at it, here's another '50s candidate for you to critique. This is a steel case, ref 2496, ca 1952 with a rather nice cal 283. The dial does look a bit like porridge, though, and the crown is wrong I think - I don't like the style of the lugs very much either I have to say (they look a bit '60s for my taste), but I do rather like the dial furniture. It's fun to have numbers everywhere else but not the quarter positions John
My guess is that these hands are standard Omega issue and the same ones were used on a lot of other watches. It's just that the cal. 420 is a bit smaller than normal, so they look larger in comparison. Take care, gatorcpa
