Help w/ 105.012 Speedmaster

Luca.P · Feb 26, 2020

Dan S
I don't disagree with anything said above, but here's a wild hypothetical just to illustrate my point. I don't know why I'm even saying this since it's unlikely as hell, but what if he cracks it open and shows us a 26M serial? Then could everything be correct except for the caseback, including the sweep hand? OK, I realize it's still a franken even with just a replaced case-back. Yes, I also see the wonky and mismatched lume, I agree it's most likely to be a put-together, and I wouldn't buy it. But we're still missing pieces of the puzzle, that's all I'm saying.

145.012 and 105.012 don´t share the same mid-case. This has the mid-case, pushers and caseback of a 105.012. IF there is a 26M serial in this watch, then not just the caseback would have been exchanged but the whole case i.e. mid-case, caseback, pushers, crown.

Dan S · Feb 26, 2020

Luca.P
145.012 and 105.012 don´t share the same mid-case. This has the mid-case, pushers and caseback of a 105.012. IF there is a 26M serial in this watch, then not just the caseback would have been exchanged but the whole case i.e. mid-case, caseback, pushers, crown.

You're right, it was a bad example, I forgot about the pushers and mid-case. It's late (not really), I've had a double Scotch (really). You win.

Luca.P · Feb 26, 2020

Dan S
You're right, it was a bad example, I forgot about the pushers and mid-case. It's late (not really), I've had a double Scotch (really). You win.

Ahaha a victory over a slightly tired, slightly drunk Omega expert, I´ll gladly take it! Meanwhile we probably got @d_c_fowler worrying if anything on his watch is correct at all

airansun · Feb 26, 2020

Dan S
But we're still missing pieces of the puzzle, that's all I'm saying.

My favorite mysteries are those with less than all the information.

Dan S · Feb 26, 2020

Luca.P
Ahaha a victory over a slightly tired, slightly drunk Omega expert, I´ll gladly take it! Meanwhile we probably got @d_c_fowler worrying if anything on his watch is correct at all

Don't get too excited ... I'm no expert.

d_c_fowler · Feb 26, 2020

@Luca.P - You are correct sir! I’m finally checking emails and this site before bed and went thru a roller coaster ride of emotions honestly. I do appreciate the honest critical dialogue though. Let’s see if I get any sleep after checking this thread! I have some fun camera gear, but a family as well so I’m not cracking anything open tonight, but I did take a pic of the movement earlier because I just needed to see it. It’s a 228xxxxxx number inside, with a case back of 105.012-64 engraved and the HF insignia.

Forgive the poor PS scrubbing of the last few numbers too-it’s late and I’m only on my phone.

ndgal · Feb 26, 2020

airansun
I wouldn’t go so far as to call it a franken; I think it was a little aggressively refreshed by someone with insufficient sympathy (so to speak).

How else would you like it to put it? It is a watch built from incorrect parts from different periods and years of manufacture = Franken.
I don't see a more "Sympathetic" way of phrasing it...
So pretty please, with a cherry on top... It's a Franken.

Luca.P · Feb 26, 2020

Dan S
Don't get too excited ... I'm no expert.

I think I´ll stick to my own narrative, thank you very much! haha

d_c_fowler · Feb 26, 2020

Separately, are there simple/easy ways to see if it’s relumed? It’s hard to tell the difference up close with some of the vintage lume photos in the Moonwatch book and sites like the DB1983 site.

Should I invest in a $10 U.V. light?

Luca.P · Feb 26, 2020

d_c_fowler

@Luca.P - You are correct sir! I’m finally checking emails and this site before bed and went thru a roller coaster ride of emotions honestly. I do appreciate the honest critical dialogue though. Let’s see if I get any sleep after checking this thread! I have some fun camera gear, but a family as well so I’m not cracking anything open tonight, but I did take a pic of the movement earlier because I just needed to see it. It’s a 228xxxxxx number inside, with a case back of 105.012-64 engraved and the HF insignia.

Forgive the poor PS scrubbing of the last few numbers too-it’s late and I’m only on my phone.

According to Speedmaster101 that is a correct serial for your watch, congratulations!

d_c_fowler · Feb 26, 2020

So,

to recap:

pushers, crown, bezel, hesalite, case, caseback, 321 movement: check

hands, sans chrono: match period

chrono: no

dial (spaced T, small E in omega logo): probably not, but maybe?

looking at the Moonwatch book, it’s saying type B3 (spaced T) was present in the -65 and -66+, but it’s confusing because it also groups the 64 & 65 together.
Looking at the Speedmaster101 site looks like the 64 doesn’t have much info on there either.

Well, at the very least it looks like I’m still in the market for a proper drop chrono hand if anyone has one to offer for sale. 😀😵‍💫

ndgal · Feb 26, 2020

Here is what a correct narrow spaced T dial on a 105.012-64/65/66 should look like (ignore the wear and weathered condition).
Aside from just the space between the T's there are more than a handful of other small differences.

d_c_fowler · Feb 26, 2020

ndgal
How else would you like it to put it? It is a watch built from incorrect parts from different periods and years of manufacture = Franken.
I don't see a more "Sympathetic" way of phrasing it...
So pretty please, with a cherry on top... It's a Franken.

If what I’m reading previously adds up, it sounds like a lot of the parts might actually add up, with the exception of the B3 spaced T dial and chrono hand. And if I’m understanding other posts correctly (and the Moonwatch book), there may not truly be an absolute there as well, being the 65 had the Spaced T’s.

I definitely defer to your (and really everyone here) knowledge and acumen. Otherwise I wouldn’t be putting myself on the chopping block to begin with. If there are parts that have been serviced or repaired after it’s “birthday”, that’s what I’m here to hopefully get more info on, and hopefully help fix if I’m able.

However, as far as sympathies, I definitely do put more stock in & appreciate the opinions of those who have the skill and grace to understand that unless you do have the absolute truth to a mystery, you try not to deal in absolutes?

My understanding of what I’ve read here of franken-watches is that they are more or less hobbled together from a random assortment of parts that don’t belong together while so far, I’m reading that possibly the dial and chrono hand are in question, with some grey area to the dial?

If I am correct in that assessment, then the watch feels a little more put together than Boris Karloff/Robert DeNiro.

ndgal · Feb 26, 2020

d_c_fowler
Separately, are there simple/easy ways to see if it’s relumed? It’s hard to tell the difference up close with some of the vintage lume photos in the Moonwatch book and sites like the DB1983 site.

Should I invest in a $10 U.V. light?

If you don't really know what to look for, a UV light won't be much help unfortunately.
It is possible to re-lume a watch with correct materials that will give the same quick-fade effect as the original lume.

ndgal · Feb 26, 2020

d_c_fowler
I’m reading that possibly the dial and chrono hand are in question, with some grey area to the dial?

The chrono hand without question does not belong to this watch.
To me at least, the dail (also without question) does not belong to this reference.

The phase-in period of the wide T dial started around the 3rd quarter of 1967. It simply did not exist before that.
The phase-out period of the narrow T dial lasted until the last quarter of 1967 (latest one that I have on hand is a late October 1967 105.012-66CB still with the narrow T dial).

I have yet to see a true one owner/untouched 105.012-64/65 (and I have bought & sold dozens of them) that came with the wide-spaced T dial.

d_c_fowler · Feb 26, 2020

ndgal
Here is what a correct narrow spaced T dial on a 105.012-64/65/66 should look like (ignore the wear and weathered condition).
Aside from just the space between the T's there are more than a handful of other small differences.

Thank you for the pic.

I’m totally on board (now that I’ve given up immediately sleeping) that it isn’t a (B2) Close T, but as I’m looking at the 3rd edition of the Moonwatch book, it does look very much like B3 spaced T’s: S with curving top loop, S & p joined, r with fairly low and short loop, applied logo, and the T’s appear for me to line up between 32 & 31 seconds on the left, and 28 & 28.2 seconds on the right.

d_c_fowler · Feb 26, 2020

ndgal
The chrono hand without question does not belong to this watch.
To me (at least) the dail (also without question) does not belong to this reference.

The phase-in period of the wide T dial started around the 3rd quarter of 1967. It simply did not exist before that.
The phase-out period of the narrow T dial lasted until the last quarter of 1967 (latest one that I have on hand is a late October 1967 105.012-66CB still with the narrow T dial).

I have yet to see a true one owner/untouched 105.012-64/65 (and I have bought & sold dozens of them) that came with the wide-spaced T dial.

Thank you for this. That helps!

Dan S · Feb 26, 2020

d_c_fowler
If what I’m reading previously adds up, it sounds like a lot of the parts might actually add up, with the exception of the B3 spaced T dial and chrono hand. And if I’m understanding other posts correctly (and the Moonwatch book), there may not truly be an absolute there as well, being the 65 had the Spaced T’s.

Leaving aside the "official" definition of Frankenwatch for the moment, I think you're unlikely to find a Speedmaster expert who has much belief that the wide-T dial is original to that watch. It just falls too far outside the range of what has been observed. I think the analysis has been comprehensive, and hopefully you're not sorry you asked the question.

Notably, there is no law that says these issues have to concern you. You are free to enjoy the watch as it is.

ndgal · Feb 26, 2020

Dan S
Leaving aside the "official" definition of Frankenwatch for the moment, I think you're unlikely to find a Speedmaster expert who has much belief that the wide-T dial is original to that watch. It just falls too far outside the range of what has been observed. I think the analysis has been comprehensive, and hopefully you're not sorry you asked the question.

Notably, there is no law that says these issues have to concern you. You are free to enjoy the watch as it is.

As always, well said and you are absolutely correct.
Only one thing, I would be concerned in the event the watch was described & sold to @d_c_fowler as an "All original & correct" 105.012-64 and he paid accordingly.
If the watch was bought at a bargain price to be worn and enjoyed, no issues here! 👍

ATWG · Feb 26, 2020

I do agree on the lume, it looks suspect to me as well and needs further investigation.

If the watch was purchased from a reputable dealer, perhaps a refund or price adjustment can be negotiated.

Help w/ 105.012 Speedmaster

Luca.P

Dan S

Luca.P

airansun

Dan S

d_c_fowler

ndgal

Luca.P

d_c_fowler

Luca.P

d_c_fowler

ndgal

d_c_fowler

ndgal

ndgal

d_c_fowler

d_c_fowler

Dan S

ndgal

ATWG

Similar threads

looking into my first vintage 105.012-65 - pls help

105.012 pusher question

Need help!! 105.012-66HF glass!

Omega Speedmaster 105.012-66 CB on an auction!

Omega Speedmaster 105.012-64 on an auction (hmmm...?)!

Building a 105.012-65