Autumn starts Friday and appropriately enough a Speedie 2998-4 with Leaf Sub Hands is listed to welcome the Fall. I really like Leaf Hands and I think the 2998-4 is the last reference to feature these. Wonder how long this will stay up as the "Wally" 2998-4 disappeared well before the auction end. This latest 2998-4 seems to tick all the boxes. Correct dial in near pristine condition. Original hands with the preferred triangular lume hour hand. Thsese hands alone are listed for over $3,000 lol. I think there is an error in the listing as luminova is mentioned. These hands and dial appear to me to have original radium lume. Listing even has a correct 1960 transitional 7077 bracelet, a big plus. Don bezel is in very good condition. Case is not overpolished and flat foot crown is correct. Pushers aren't original but are the correct 4mm size. A complete, very attractive, offering and did I mention it has Leaf Sub Register Hands? A guesses on final price? I'll say $30k. https://www.ebay.com/itm/232494374463Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
It's scary how similar that looks to my 2998-3, in terms of lume color (both the dial and the hands). And agree with the leaf hands adding a whole different dimension to the watch. IMO, they truly set the early 2998's apart from the rest. The description mentioned that the auction would run to the end no matter what, so hopefully we get a chance to see what happens here. I'm going to guess $29,999, Bob.
Those leaf hands are original. The service replacements look slightly different.. If you look at the center of all 4 hands, you can see some wear from being removed and reinstalled, so they arent new. Color seems to match center second hand and dial print is also pretty white so, I think its all original and just very clean.
I emailed the seller and he was very clear that there was "no price" I could offer to get him to end the auction early. That said, I would wager that it goes the distance. Maybe we will see what a 2998-4's value really is in the open market
Seller just added some additional photos. What is our chance of dealing with this bit too much of corrosion?
I saw the same corrosion in the photos and in defense of the seller, he did mention it. Based on the condition of the movement, it doesn’t look like the corrosion has effected the movement. If it was that severe, it would certainly have allowed water or moisture into the movement and I see no evidence of that. It appears it is purely cosmetic and not a concern. The caseback also appears to be able to be installed and removed without issue, so the corrosion didn’t effect the threads or perimeter of caseback. Not the prettiest but, it is covered and hidden by the caseback/bracelet and not dangerous to dial or movement.
There's this 2998-1, Base 1000, coming up at Kaplans in November. Not a speedie expert, but it looks interesting.
I saw this when it was pointed out in another thread and happened to be wearing my 2998-4 at the time. The only difference between this and mine is the triangular lume on the hour hand and I think this dial is better. I see nothing wrong outside of the pushers and think it's a good to very good example ... as i said in the other thread, I'm going to say it's a £23,000 piece ($31,000) at current exchange rate.
Looks like we are discussing two different watches in one thread. My views: 2998-1 Tropical @ Kaplans: Apart from the fact that its a -1, I think that watch is a mess. The Base 1000 bezel is excellent and that alone should push the sale over 20k regardless of anything else. The seller is going to push the fact the dial is brown (tropical) and diminish the fact that its messed up. Gemini calls it a "cosmic" dial presumably because it looks like the night sky. In the Rolex world its called a "starlight" dial but, in my world its not attractive or valuable, again apart from the fact its original. Already mentioned its got the wrong bracelet and wrong end links and minute hand, but I think the pushers are incorrect as well. Not one of the best examples I have seen. Corrosion and pitting to be expected. http://www.kaplans.se/en/auktioner/3287/vara/1383467 2998-4 @ eBay: I really like this watch for its originality. DON bezel is a 8 out of 10 and as good as to be expected on a 57 year old watch. No question the hands and dial lume are correct and the dial appears essentially perfect. If it was tropical it would be out of this world (I like brown dials) but, as far as -4's go, they dont typically turn brown. Overall dial surface is flawless and lume is very good. Would like to see a UV photo showing how it glows. Pushers were definitely replaced at some point, but they are the "correct" pushers at 4mm and not too big or too small. Bracelet looks essentially new, so it was probably refinished at some point. One of the best overall examples I have seen as so many have the wrong hands and damaged dials, which are the hardest parts to source. Corrosion and pitting to be expected. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Genuine-Vin...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network 2998-4 @ ebay that was ended early: No question it was a nice piece but, I didnt get a chance to comment that I thought the hands were relumed. Wrong subdial hands. Dial and dial lume were excellent and attractive. Yellow dial lume on a black dial always POPS. DON bezel was also very good, 9/10. Case looked refinished to me with brushed sides and polished top but, it didnt look factory to me. All of the white hands appeared to be painted a gloss white and all of the original hands I have seen are matte. A close look did reveal some pitting between the lugs, but many of these -4's had pitting and corrosion. Must have been the metal they used or real life useage. No bracelet, Head only. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Ome...kYFG95mFXwHohUiFgmTXA%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=ncPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
What makes you question the hands on that one? My understanding is both leaf and stick are correct on the 2998-4. Is it the paint or something else that has you questioning them?
The people who write the books have their opinions on things that are "uncertain" as do the website owners and collectors. Naiad Crowns on Speedys? Experts can't agree. Stick hands on 2998-4 subdials? Not for me. I feel that the -4's should always have leaf hands in order to be original and correct. I am from the camp that the stick subdial hands began with the -5. That is my opinion which I am sure will get others to jump in, but lets start another thread if we want to get into all of that. Things like this are all over the Vintage Rolex world and to this day not everyone agrees on all things. The blanket answer for everything is "Omega (Rolex) used what parts they had lying around and anything is possible". What is possible or what is accepted as correct are two different animals. I do not accept anything but leaf subdial hands on ALL 2998-1, 2998-2, 2998-3 and 2998-4. Besides being correct, they are just cooler, more rare and more valuable to boot. Reposted from the Moonwatch Only Book and Davidoff Brothers. I hope I am not breaking any rules or laws by taking a picture of the pages as I do rightfully own both and am not disseminating the images for profit. NOTE: Both books show -4 with leaf and -5 with stick..
Nope. Either sub hand style is correct on a 2998-4. B2 hands = Sub Leafs B3 hands = Sub Straights Plenty of examples of both in the wild. Note: relying on memory. MWO is home and I am not.
And the book also says that lolipop second hands were an option and I disagree with that too. Plenty of DNN bezels on 321 movements in the wild too and that doesnt make them right. People with stick subdials would like to believe they are original but I disagree. B2 is leaf and B3 is stick. There are B4 variations too, but not for a -4. One of my favorite arguments with Rolex guys is to show me literature from 1960 showing stick hands on a 2998-4 Show me that and I will change my position but, if all Omega catalogs and ads show leaf, then I only support the leaf theory. I saw a picture somewhere of an Orange second hand on a Speedy that was "factory". Dont believe that either..
For most collectors, Omega Catalogs and sales literature are not accepted as historical proof. The literature was printed well before actual production and often contained inaccurate renderings of final production specifications.
So Gemini4.. why is the onus on collectors like me to support why stick hands were never an option? Why isnt the onus on collectors like you to provide support that they were? I have seen countless barn find watches, several of them 2998-4's and not once have they had stick subdial hands. ALL of them had leaf's. So, if we can all agree that leaf was definitely legit and many disagree on sticks being legit, then shouldnt those who accept them be able to justify and prove that they were? Not on me to show that Porsche never made a factory polka dot paint job, its on you to prove they did. I cant show you something that I feel wasnt an option. And as far as the literature being printed early and having inaccurate renderings, surely ONE SINGLE piece of literature, perhaps very late in the 2998-4 or early 2998-5 would show a 2998-4 with sticks, no? Not a 2998-5, because those DID have sticks. One shred of proof that 2998-4's did from the factory...
I thought that's what mwo was about. Collectors proving baselines based on research done in cooperation with the Omega museum. Personally, I'll go with that reference unless or until something more definitive comes along.