I purchased the cal. 551, ref. 14393 10sc, ca. 1959 Constellation a few months ago along with the cal. 561 (date)
ref. 14393 4, 1961. Did both of these come with the decagonal crown? I have read where the original crowns
are sometimes replaced when serviced. Many of them now have a standard crown like mine. Both of these
do have the Omega symbol on the crown. Was there a problem with the decagonal crowns? (Disregard the Tudor)

 

No, there was not a problem with the origional crowns. Crowns are a wear item as over time their rubber seals wear out and the crowns got replaced. Since these origional crowns haven't been available for some time they get replaced with what is available.

Some origional crowns...

Thicker Decagonal (1954) reference 2799


Narrower Decagonal (1964) reference 168.005


Serrated crown (1960) reference 14393


Serrated crown (1959) reference 14381

As you can see my reference 14393 has a serrated crown but I believe yours could have come with either the narrow decagonal or the serrated crowns. Hope this has helped you at least a little.

 

+1
Most of the time replaced by the newer-therefore-better-replacements-at-hand.
Actually rather a lot of them still have their original crowns...

C-case ref 168.029 with 751


352 RG ref 2577/2520 from approx 1951


344 (2x...) ref 2766 from approx 1953

 

Also, they can have old replacments, my '56 Connie has a period correct replacement crown now, omega made crowns for watchmakers to use as replacements back then too.. So you have about six decades of omega making replacements for just this one model, and even the replacements have changed over time.. I hope you can understand what I'm saying it's hard to explain.

 

Should be easy to find an appropriate replacement on Ebay.

 

Actually there was a widely reported problem with usability of the thin decagonal crown and that's why it's one of the few crowns that's been discontinued by Omega. Most of the other crown styles, including the thick decagonal, are still available new.

The thick decagonal are used on at least 6 different Constellation references, not just one. It would be very rare if a crown was ever created for just one watch model. If there was, it's very likely been discontinued already.

 

Decagonal crown on a seamaster

 

That must be Kyle's watch, rare to have in that condition.

Interesting that most of the contemporary Seamasters have the same tube size as the Constellations of the time, but only the 2984 are known to have the decagonal crown.

 

Kyle's then Dennis,s, now residing in sunny Oz

( funny how watches get around on the forum with not a FS listing to be found )

 

What I meant was there are slight differences between decades of replacement thick crowns. I have a replacement one from the 50's, it's nothing like a new one. I also had a replacement from the 80's or so that I know was real omega, and it was a little different too.

 

The 50's one has a rotten gasket Even though it's never been used, so I took it off.

 

Service crown on mine. Much preferred over the original.

 

I have an original thin crown on mine. It's worn and a bit of a b!tch to turn when needed. I'd like to replace it someday.

 

It's better but actually doesn't fit and won't seal properly on your watch.

 

I think we had this conversation before. The tedium of setting this is bad enough. Smaller crown would be worse.

 

I don't remember I've ever discussed this issue before. Specifically, the tube size of your crown is bigger than the tube on the case and therefore won't seal it (not counting the hole's depth yet).

 

You mentioned it when I posted the watch for the first time. If I ever decide to sell perhaps I'll correct it.

 

Did I? Sorry But it's still not a service crown... uh, never mind...