ok. I may have just done something rash. I've been after a 1982 Speedmaster for a while and then I stumbled across this Speedy being sold for spares or repairs. It looked in decent shape but apparently the chronograph doesn't work. I know I should have posted here to check first but I was concerned the deal was too good and it'd be gone soon. Lugs look correct. Dial and hands seem OK. Case may have been polished but bezel looks ok. Main concern is the case back. Does the 145.022 look in the correct font? Looks a bit big to me. Anyway - honest assessment please. I'm hoping it's not a case of 'a little knowledge can be dangerous'. Serial 45249558 which I think makes it 1982 on Chuck Maddox
Congrats, I got my birth year speedy last month a nice 71.......enjoy the wearing. Next you will be looking for your birth date speedy........
Birth date watch!? Don't give me any ideas. Thanks @72c that's good to see. Any red flags that you can see at all?
Bezel is a 1990s model, movement dust cover is probably a replacement, and the hands look to me like they could be superluminova. Dial's correct though and the movement probably lines up
Thanks - that's good to know. So the hands have been replaced at some stage then? Do you think I should be able to find a period bezel with much ease?
I'm fuzzy on these later models, but I wouldn't be surprised if everything is correct and original but it's just an early 90's model rather than 80's.
The serial has it at 1982 though, according to Maddox http://chronomaddox.com/omega_serial_numbers.html
Maybe the third and forth digits make a big difference, but I've seen a wide range of later Speedies with mid 40 serials. Id certainly take the 1982 date with a pinch of salt.
Need to get an extract to be sure of date. From my experience Omega didn't always use movements in numerical order. So Maddock is only a general guide to date.
The hands may have been replaced, but could be original. I can't tell from the photo, but if they look more white than creamy, I'd say yes. Given the replacement bezel though, this is a distinct possibility. The caseback, I forgot to mention, is totally fine as others have said! The bezel will be neither easy nor cheap to replace - the same bezel is correct for later -69 models (including the Straight Writing) all the way through late '80s models. They don't come up for sale often, but the last one I remember seeing sold for somewhere in the $500 range earlier this year. I'd expect that figure has risen though as more attention is paid to the later -69s with the DNN bezel
I'm not at home so don't have MWO, but I wouldn't rule out it being late 80's/early 90's and that bezel being original. Off the top of my head I just can't remember when they were introduced. It may be a service item, but I'd want to double check dates etc before saying for sure.
I'm slightly confused about the bezel issue. Does DNN not mean dot next to 90? Sorry, showing my ignorance here
Yes it does, but where there is only really one base500 DoN (possibly two if you could font thickness), there are several DNN. The one on your watch is usually associated with more modern, 90's onwards watches, whereas your serial and case back suggest 80's (which one would usually expect to see come with a tall lettered DNN). I'm just saying I'm not sure if there was a period where a 45xxxxxx, CRS caseback and small lettered DNN overlap. If there was, your bezel could be correct. If not, it's a service replacement.
Ok thanks for the info - I appreciate you taking the time. Think my first step is to get an extract and from there decide how much I want to put into it. If it is actually a 1982 model I wouldn't mind taking the hit on a period bezel. I'll post some more picture when I get it. Thanks guys
Don't exactly know for the bezel, caseback looks good to me. As for the hands do they glow long in the dark or not?
I'm sure someone with a copy of MWO to hand can confirm when this bezel was first used. If not, I'll check at the weekend.