Help identifying Omega cal 266 1954

[lucasindus]

I bought this watch on eBay. The seller said it had been serviced ~1 year ago and everything -even the strap- was original. Does anyone have any thoughts? The serial number is 14581745 which would date it to 1954. The caliber is 266. I cannot find an exact match in the Omega archive, as this one has a unique combination of sub-second with a "cross" style (not inside of a circle, I'm not sure how this would be called), numbering in the multiples of 2, and leaf hands. I am also not sure whether the crown is original as there is no Omega logo in it.
Any help and insights are very much appreciated
Thank you!
Lucas

 

[mac_omega]

all looks original including the unmarked crown but the sub-sec worries me. IMO it might be a partial reprint in the subdial.

added to edit: I am talking about the watch not the obviously wrong expandable bracelet

Edited: Jun 20, 2024

 

[JimInOz]

Bracelet is nor original.
Crown most probably not.
Need a good pic of the dial and the inside caseback for more info.

 

[gatorcpa]

Looks like 1 o’clock marker was replaced.
gatorcpa

 

[JimInOz]

gatorcpa

Looks like 1 o’clock marker was replaced.
gatorcpa

Looks like a reflection from a mark on the crystal so hopefully it's OK.

 

[UncleBuck]

JimInOz

Looks like a reflection from a mark on the crystal so hopefully it's OK.

Good eye, Jimbo!
That reflection makes it look like an arrowhead marker at first glance.

 

[Syrte]

@JimInOz you know Omega much better than I do but the crown IMHO is an original Omega crown. It is exactly the same as the crown on Omega RAF watches such as mine below.

 

[drose224]

That is a nice watch.

 

[JimInOz]

Syrte

@JimInOz you know Omega much better than I do but the crown IMHO is an original Omega crown. It is exactly the same as the crown on Omega RAF watches such as mine below.

Thanks S, as Erich also noted, the crown is correct for that era.

At least I got the bracelet right .

 

[Geezer]

It's unusual that the subdial is not recessed, however there is a clear circular discoloration compared to the rest of the dial. Could the dial have been cleaned and removed some of the markers?

 

[lucasindus]

Hi all, Thank you so much for your replies, very insightful! I think the sub-second marker is slightly rusted and thus the extra decoloration compared to the rest of the dial. I will attach some more pictures of the dial and caseback as requested. The 1 o'clock is the same as the rest, just the reflection. I paid £240 ~300$, thoughts on this? Overpaid, or underpaid?

 

[Geezer]

I'm reasonably sure everything is ok and original. I guess the sub dial may have aged slightly differently due to the presence of the running second hand and maybe some humidity.

In any case, it's a great looking watch. I really like the hours markers and the patina of the dial doesn't really bother me.

The price is perfectly fine.

 

[lucasindus]

Geezer

I'm reasonably sure everything is ok and original. I guess the sub dial may have aged slightly differently due to the presence of the running second hand and maybe some humidity.

In any case, it's a great looking watch. I really like the hours markers and the patina of the dial doesn't really bother me.

The price is perfectly fine.

Great, really gives me peace of mind! Yes! I loved the leaf-style hands. This was my first omega so I was a bit anxious about getting ripped off so your comments really helped!

 

[padders]

I had guessed it was a UK market model. A Dennison 13322 in fact. Assuming it is running as well as the movement looks, I think you did very well.

 

[lucasindus]

padders

I had guessed it was a UK market model. A Dennison 13322 in fact. Assuming it is running as well as the movement looks, I think you did very well.

Yes! It's only losing a handful of seconds a day which is pretty good for a watch this age!