Dear experts,

I would be very glad to know more about my (inherited) omega vintage watch. Box and papers are missing. According the serial number the movement's production year should be 1952. I took some photos:

Dial:



Back (dot-like pattern imprint originating from a nylon strap):



Movement (two missing screws):



Lid:



Crown:



Thank you very much for your expertise!

Best regard,
Mega-O

 

I think it's a redial - the font of 'Omega' looks wrong... think the A should have a slight flat top?
https://omegaforums.net/threads/omega-trésor-ref-2687-solid-gold.59710/

 

Wow. I don't know anything about that watch but that dial is simply astounding.

ETA: Image search shows others of that ref with a pointy A. The dial is in such exceptional condition that it's hard to believe, but I think it's original.

 

I think so, too. It's not second hand, thus I think I know its history from the beginning and that it has never got a new dial. It has been used for some years and has been "replaced" by one of the first digital wrist watches (my father, who bought the omega and the digital don't liked the manual winding ... ;-))

 

There’s no doubt about this being a redial.
There are multiple give-aways, one being the fonts. The Swiss Made is wrong and positioned incorrectly, and the subdial printing is too small for the recessed area. You can see the remnants of the concentric circles where they were sanded away when the dial was prepped.
The two screws should be sourced because they hold the movement in the case and keep it from rattling around.
At some point your relative had the watch serviced and the dial was repainted, a common thing for a watchmaker to do.
Get a competent watchmaker to replace the screws and wear the watch knowing your relative cared enough to have it fixed up for the next generation.

 

My 2687.

 

I vote redial too. The crown is a modern replacement too the case looks rose gold, the crown yellow gold plated. I can't say I like the look of the brass spacer ring around the movement. I would expect an Omega case to be solid gold, not part gold part brass in the way that Chronographe Suisse chronos are constructed (ie cheaply). This may be something others have seen before but it isn't something I have. Nato strap rash on the back is very common and can happen on hardened steel as well as soft gold. I never use a Nato for this reason. I had a Damasko with slight NATO rash, something the company would say was impossible.

It is a pretty thing but not as original as all that I fear.

 

Thx Rman for your comment and the hint regarding the screws!

Perhaps you are right in regard to the dial - in contrast, the imprints of the nylon strap have not been "fixed". I don't understand the technical details, but I do not understand why the "OMEGA" needs to be repainted and all the rest of the dial not. Which lead me to the question, whether the dial's design is original or not:

I searched the web for images before my posting, but I had no luck finding the dial's design - just dials with similar elements. Is the design well known or common? That was the reason for my initial question. How is the model called? Jumbo? Tresor? Just Ref. 2687? I have no clue.

 

Thx padders for your comment, especially regarding the crown. If you are right, how are the chances and is it worth to search/get a rose gold omega crown?

Another question: In case I'll keep the watch, I would like to wear it of course, but currently it has a massive yellow gold strap (I cut the photos, to prevent getting eye-cancer). I would like to replace it by a leather strap - what about a matching rose-gold omega buckle? Are these still available, or do I need to (hopefully) shoot one for example on ebay? I also think of requesting an archive extract from omega. Seems this sensible to you, too?

 

I like it as well. I'd get it serviced (and replace the screws) and wear it without worrying about the fact that it appears to be a re-dial, which was probably done in period as part of a service. It still looks lovely and is a really nice memento.

Cheers, Chris

 

Do you mean the ring that is embossed "METAL"? If so, I've seen this often (ok, not in nature, but on various photographies), e.g.:

https://www.chrono24.de/omega/overz...-handaufzug-rosegold-18kt-2687--id5972955.htm
https://www.chrono24.de/omega/overs...687-cal-265-rose-gold-18k-rare--id7937057.htm
https://www.ebay.de/itm/Omega-034-D...bo-18k-Pink-Gold-Honeycomb-dial-/142761450470Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

These links are not meant for advertising. - I'll remove them in case they break the forum's rules. BTW: "Deville Tresor" is this possible?

 

Yes that is what I meant. As you say, if there are other examples then I guess it is correct The larger 37mm size 30T2 watches are comparatively rare it isn't something I had noticed before. As I mentioned you see it often with Landeron chronos and I will look at those now in a new light since I had assumed this wasn't great practice. If that dial is original then it is a wonderful thing you have there, if not it is still very pretty indeed. I was a little harsh earlier in criticism.

 

I am afraid the minute hand is not original to the watch either (apart from the refinished dial).

 

Actually the second hand either.

 

Last time I looked, you could still buy a modern genuine Omega rose gold plated buckle from Cousins Uk or an AD for not too much money, like £25/$35.

 

I'm afraid, I don't know how the original hands (should) look like - do you have any references for me? Thanks a lot.

 

this is my 2687 (away being serviced) original hands are whats on @hoipolloi watch or mine

 

I don't understand the intention of your post: Do you mean the hands from yours are identical to mine, so both are original? I cannot see any difference between mine and yours (if the picture shows yours).

BTW: @hoipolloi's black hand (the little second's hand) seems strange to me (all, ok not all, but the most 18k vintages I've seen so far had golden hands)

 

I'll echo what @Rman said - not about the originality or otherwise as I have too little knowledge to comment, but the advice "wear the watch knowing your relative cared enough to have it fixed up for the next generation." In fact, you might want to regard the redial as as much a part of the history of the watch as the wear on the caseback. In my opinion, whether all original or not, it's an attractive heirloom watch and I hope you enjoy wearing it.

 

Thanks for the echo, Mouse_at_Large!

@all: What do you think, could an extract from omega's archive be helpful? I don't know what kind of information such an extract contains.