If you mean the 198.001, most I have seen are labelled Seamaster but it wouldn't worry me to find one without a sub-brand label for the reasons I mention above.



Pic from electric-watches.

 

Seen different models of this. With and without Seamaster logo. With Seamaster caseback and smooth caseback . All i can think of is that Omega did different models of the 198.001

 

No I'm talking about the 196.001. All of them, that I have seen are not labeled Seamaster but only f300. I have two of them. 2 out of 6 of my 198.001 are also f300 only.

 

Not sure I have ever seen an f300 with a 196 ref number.
As they were all marketed as Chronometers the 3 digit should always be an 8.

The dial labelling is a bit of a mystery though, I recall doing some research years ago and it threw up something relating to the various global markets the watches were sold in.
The exact reason though, sadly escapes me.

 

The ones that you had, did you check that they actually said 196.001 in the caseback? I am curious as Paul's site is quite clear in that he considers all f300 hummer 3 handers to be 198s. Either he is mistaken or the sellers of the 196.001 watches are wrong and there are watches out there described as such I acknowledge, on Chrono24 for example.

As KT says above, the difference in meaning is the chronometer certification, a 196 should in theory not be chronometer rated. If both Keith and Paul think they are all 198s then that is a strong weight of learned opinion IMO.

 

Sorry i mean 196.001 ofcourse .

 

As I mentioned above, I have two of the 196001 (stamped without the dot after the first 3 digits). Didn't know that they are an anomaly.

 

I would genuinely like to see that, if you are able to take and post caseback and dial shots from one it may help to widen the knowledge base on hummers worldwide. Since the 001 is presumably the very first hummer model, it is just possible that they were substantially different to the rest of the breed, perhaps they called them 196 before they decided to certify them all for instance and then went with 198.

 

Here is a picture of one of the reference 196001.

 

Well it certainly looks like 196, though the second part looks more like 601 to me in that pic ( which may be my error as 196.601 doesn't make a lot of sense)! Omega do have a history of using cases for multiple lines so perhaps that is what happened here, or something else weird is going on. It is marked as a chonmometer on the dial though so by their own logic it should have been a 198. No Bulova licence statement on that back either which is unusual though not unheard of. Maybe yours is a weird Japanese market special or a very early prototype or something different altogether.

Here is a sold ebay listing for the same dial with a 198 caseback:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1970-Omega-Electronic-Chronometer-f300-tunning-fork-ref-198-001-nearly-NOS-/182504363638?hash=item2a7e1b9676:g:sokAAOSwo4pYdlls&nma=true&si=MmNP1ybk3dd%2BmJfgGIEr1hrkUOg%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

 

I have made a picture of the other watch as well and a closer shot of the case back.





This one has the Bulova patent stamp, but it looks like it has been engraved later then the rest. The serial number of the movement seems to be an early one (32.002.000).

 

Very interesting. I wonder if there is a significance in that both your 196.001s are CB (La Centrale Boîte) manufactured casebacks (and presumably cases). Off the top of my head, the majority I have seen are from other manufacturers or not marked so perhaps they did an early batch marked thus and lost the contract or ceased production or who knows! Having searched further, I have found a few of these advertised for sale and a NOS 196.001 case described as for the 1250 hummer movement for sale in Sweden so you are not the only one with a watch described thus. It is a bit of mystery alright.

 

I'm no expert on these (I don't service them) but I did take some time to look at the Omega Extranet. In searching the case numbers 196001, 196601, 1960001, and 1966001 all return no results on a query for information.

I then searched on the 1250 movement, and did a reverse search for cases - there are maybe 90 cases for these movements (2 different hand heights are available apparently) and none start with 196. Most are 198 or 398, and then there are some others, like these:

055BA726
055BA7282
055BA7264
055BC7264

So although clearly not all of these have 198 as the first 3 digits of the case number, the 196's are a mystery. I assume an Extract of one of these 196 cases would provide additional information.

Cheers, Al

 

I don't know. If the extract would be reasonably priced I would do it, but not in case of 120€. Longines offers this service for free.

 

Not suggesting you should do it, only that if you chose to it would likely help answer the questions. I know some people are not happy having to pay, and often cite Longines as the example. On the other hand you can't get anything from Rolex for any amount of money, so I think Omega is not out of line charging a fee for this - it likely just covers their costs.

Likely not worth it on these based on their market value.

Cheers, Al

 

Thanks for the input Al. It is always good to hear concrete info even if it doesn't solve the mystery.

 

Don't get me wrong, I also would like to know more about the watches but not at any costs. Anyway, thanks for your information Al.

 

The Omega f8192 electroquartz were the only ones I could find with a 196 ref. number.

 

My latest acquisition - Speedsonic in the best (imo) variant: Black dial, lumed aging Tritium indices and non-lobster.

 

Is the case refinished? I think the small ring around the crystal should be polished not brushed. Anyway nice hummer.