Does Anyone Know How Many Straight Writing Speedmasters Were Produced?

pdxleaf

I'd agree that it's premature to label these as Mark 1, 2 and 3. There's just too little evidence right know. In my mind, it's reasonable to form a hypothesis that there may have been earlier productions or even different batches. But that needs more evidence. Often the reality is different than what at first it seems.

In my own opinion, it is unusual but not impossible that this watch came from Omega like this. The 1969 gold speedmasters were delivered to the astronauts on Nov 25th, 1969. There's enough time between then and October, 1970 to make a steel case back version.

The Japan World Exposition, or Expo '70, which was held in Osaka from March 15 to September 3, 1970, featured a moon rock brought back by Apollo 12 astronauts as a major exhibit. This was possibly a catylst for the Japanese Omega distributor to order SWA11 steel watches. Some timelines are tight but not impossible.

The primary question for me seems to be which came first, did Omega decide to make a few steel SWA11 on their own and deliver them to Argentina and Switzerland, or did the Japanese distributor give Omega the idea to create these? It's possible that Omega made a few, and then made more for the Japanese market using a different font. (Why different fonts? Were there different suppliers?)

So far for me, it's possible that there might be batches that were distributed in sequence, but it's still conjecture at this point, waiting on more data.

Ron_W

MWO does not make that type distinction, just shows 3 different fonts for the SWA11 - 3 producers or the engraving tool broke down at least 2 times ? so i am not in favor of calling it MK1, 2 or 3.

Your movement number is a 1970 production but delivery in 1970 or 1971 ? Either would not be with an SW caseback. MWO writes "deliveries were postponed waiting for NASA permission for using their name" and production of these caseback is mentioned as 1971. It could be your watch was delivered later and Omega made use of whatever was lying around still and then the 220 bezel would be a left over one in 1972 when the SW caseback was mounted ?
So for me the 220 bezel is not the coincidence here ( in line with the movement nr ), but the caseback is.

You have an anomaly, and an attractive one !, but it is not the most logical combination of parts.

Ron_W

Assume all you want but with just 3 ? examples we are nowhere near anything conclusive or classifiable other then ; anomaly. Lets leave this to professionals like MWO - that already lists the 3 versions - and be careful with comparing your research with the body of work they have done.

Ron_W

I wonder how you missed this thread then in your extensive search ? and how you claim you found something that was already in MWO ?

Ron_W

What you mean is ; not in line with your own assumptions.

Ron_W

Have you contacted Marquie and Rossler already ?

Ron_W

And a very nice A11 with the early number 29'6009xx and a DON bezel. It is scary close to the earlier posted one from dr Crott so it could be the same watch ? With the Wako Japan one it is the 2nd one with DON bezel.

Ron_W

even on the gold versions 145.022-69 BA the engraving is not very refined imo, the other version look like better quality work to me. Maybe they also tried a first run on steel before doing the 18K one s ? The movement nr needs the extract to date it as it is early indeed, so maybe another example of "use what is still in stock".