Help Needed On Speedmaster Professional 105.012 65 HF Case

That dial... 👎

Hands, pushers, crown and bracelet not original. Case back looks like it might have been polished which would make me think the case has been also. If it's been in a safe for 50 years it had a hard few years before that. It's a great reference though.

You should now research the dial. Closely…

Since a few have asked me about my comments regarding the dial on this example, I figured I would post this here as it seems no-one that has seen this thread has been able to spot the fake dial on the OP's watch.

First off, (In my book) the 105.012-65 reference did not come with a "Wide-T" dial, so whenever I see one, the Red lights immediately turn on.
The dial on this particular example is so off, that the "Wide-T's" are the least of its problems.

Let's first look at a "Narrow-T" dial, which in my opinion is the only correct dial for the 105.012-65 reference:



Now let's have a look at a "Wide-T" dial which only makes its appearance circa 3rd quarter of 1967, well into the 105.012-66 reference.



Now let's compare both the above dials to the one on the OP's watch:



There are many more tiny nuances that are not correct to any known original AML/321 dial variant, but let's only focus on applied logo and the
OMEGA
Speedmaster
PROFESSIONAL

Here they are side by side:



You'll notice that the shape of the metal logo and the OMEGA Speedmaster PROFESSIONAL print on the fake dial are completely off.
Without examining the dial outside of the watch, I cannot tell if this is a variant of a later Luminova service dial that has been 'converted' into a Tritium dial, or just a (decent?) effort at a fake. Whatever it may be, this dial has no connection to this watch nor to the 105.012-65 reference in general.

And just for the fun of it, let's have a look at what I refer to as a "Specimen Example" of a 105.012-65 in almost unworn condition.
Once you've owned or handled one of these in this condition. Near new and as close to 'factory fresh' as possible (55 years later), it becomes very easy to decipher any other example that is lesser-then, or does not match up to the specification.