Forums Latest Members
  1. Vizard Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    Hi All, I am new here.

    I have never owned an Omega, until today. But I wanted a modestly sized yellow gold watch and they just aren't available new (in a style that I like anyway), so I bought a vintage one, a CAL 283. 1950 to be precise.

    The watch is all original and newly serviced. The dial has been professionally refurbished.

    I have put it on a timegrapher and dial up it runs at -20. Crown down -90 and 12 down is -32. It runs fairly steady at those rates. Amplitude varies 180-210 and beat error is 1-1.5ms.

    If this were a modern watch I would send it for service. However, is this typical of a 70 year old Omega? I am guessing that it is.

    I'd be grateful for any info regarding these please.
     
    1.jpg
  2. Canuck Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    13,377
    Likes
    37,538
    If you are unaccustomed to mechanical watches, and particularly manual winders, be certain you are wind it fully, until the crown no longer turns. If you already are doing that, then I would suggest the seller should send it back to the shop for a do-over! Your Omega likely never did keep the time that a modern watch in good shape should keep. But you say it is 90 seconds slow in one position! It would seem to me there is something quite wrong for it to be out that much in the one position. The other rates you give are better, but they are not great either. If you are going to dabble in vintage watches, I suggest that you never pay a premium for a “serviced” watch. And have a trusted shop service it for you. That way, you have some recourse if you aren’t happy with the performance. Oh, and the Timegrapher might cause you to expect a higher standard of accuracy than the watch is capable of.
     
    Larry S, Davidt, Undertaker2 and 2 others like this.
  3. Vizard Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    I am aware that a timegrapher is like heroin to someone as inclined to OCD as I am! By contrast, I have my Rolex Sub 14060M on there at the moment that is running +1 dial up and -1 crown down.
     
  4. Canuck Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    13,377
    Likes
    37,538
    My point, exactly! Properly serviced and adjusted, I think 20 seconds per day or better should be possible. On occasion, it makes better sense to regulate for accuracy on the wrist, rather than to strive to turn the watch into a chronometer, which it never was. Timing machines are an aid in repairing and adjusting watches, but rating them (bringing them to time) is sometimes best done on the wrist, rather than on a timing machine.
     
    watchyouwant, MtV and Duracuir1 like this.
  5. Vizard Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    Well, you say that, but when it was new it was a certified chronometer. I am not sure what chronometer tolerances were in 1950, mind you.
     
  6. Pvt-Public Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    2,282
    Likes
    3,043
    That was also 60+ years ago. I have one from circa. 1947, it runs close to specs. and that's good enough for me.
     
    Undertaker2 likes this.
  7. Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    26,344
    Likes
    65,054
    No, those are not good numbers. It needs a service.
     
    Syrte, ChrisN, Farmer and 6 others like this.
  8. watchyouwant ΩF Clairvoyant Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    5,121
    Likes
    8,623
    Sure about that ? Which movement ?
     
    Scarecrow Boat and Dan S like this.
  9. Canuck Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    13,377
    Likes
    37,538
    The refinished dial says it is a chronometer, but the movement tells me otherwise.
     
    wagudc, MtV, Revo and 3 others like this.
  10. Dan S Oct 15, 2021

    Posts
    18,604
    Likes
    42,878
    I don't think I've seen a cal 283 chronometer that I can recall. And obviously we can't believe anything written on the dial. Can you show a photo of the movement?
     
    watchyouwant likes this.
  11. Vizard Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    This is the shot from the dealer's marketing.

    The dealer guarantees that the watch is all original on pain of a full refund for an unlimited period, if it turns out not to be.

    Something is a little odd, though. Despite posting awful numbers on the timegrapher, the watch seems to be keeping quite good time OTW.
     
    1serthg.png
  12. JimInOz Melbourne Australia Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    15,404
    Likes
    32,171
    I'd be taking the dealer up on his promise if it was sold as a chronometer (it's bog standard 283).

    It was never a chronometer until the day the dial was repainted.

    What is the reference number inside the caseback?

    Do you have a link to the sale site?
     
  13. Vizard Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    I would prefer to keep the dealer site out of the dialogue. But here is the case back. FWIW I didn’t pay a premium for it being a chronometer.
     
    D02CF229-7BDA-4671-8CBC-47C51F0336DB.jpeg
  14. Scarecrow Boat Burt Macklin, FBI Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    5,153
    Likes
    23,381
    A repainted dial no longer qualifies this as “all original.” Especially since it was repainted to something it never was to begin with.

    £3,500 is quite the premium IMO.
     
    Edited Oct 16, 2021
    Lucasssssss, Archer and MtV like this.
  15. Vizard Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    Had I paid that, it may have been. ;)
     
  16. JimInOz Melbourne Australia Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    15,404
    Likes
    32,171
    An English cased watch by Dennison, so trying to reference against anything is difficult.

    The bottom number is Dennison's internal serial number which ties the case parts together as they were pretty well hand fitted.

    Dennison may have used the Omega numbering system for the top number which would indicate.

    (1) Gents Watch
    (3) Manual Winding Centre Second
    (3) Non Water Resistant Chronometer
    (02) Possibly ALD numbering.
     
  17. Vizard Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    So, contrary to the previous comment it IS a chronometer?
     
  18. JimInOz Melbourne Australia Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    15,404
    Likes
    32,171
    It houses a caliber 283, which is not chronometer rated.

    My suggestion that Dennison may have used an Omega style for the top number is simply my suggestion, nothing more. Due to records for Dennison watches being hard to find, we shall probably never know.

    If they did in fact use that system and they originally produced the watch as a chronometer, then the watch would not have had a caliber 283.
     
    cvalue13, MtV and watchyouwant like this.
  19. Vizard Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    Incidentally, some background to this purchase:

    I wanted to buy a modern yellow gold watch of 36-37mm. However, there are very few options available.

    I was chewing over a Patek 5196 second hand and thought, "hmm I am paying a lot of money for technology that hasn't change for 100 years. As yellow gold is a bit of experiment, why not buy a watch from when modestly sized gold watches were commonplace?"

    So I started looking for a relatively "large" vintage gold watch whose appearance is quite classic. My shortlist was the watch I bought, or a IWC CAL. 89. My son, who has far better taste than I, pointed me to the Omega.

    It's a lovely looking little watch and despite the timegrapher data seems to keep okay time.

    A couple of things that surprise me are that the movement appears to be non-hacking and also it is quite heavy to wind fully. But then, my point of reference is the modern watches I own.

    My purchase is not cast in stone. I like the little Omega very much, but if it has issues it will go back to the dealer.
     
  20. Vizard Oct 16, 2021

    Posts
    208
    Likes
    182
    So are you saying that the movement and case don't match?