Hi all,

New to the forum, and the world of vintage Omega. After a lot of looking, I recently bought a 1961 Speedmaster CK2998. It came with a bracelet which I believe to be the correct 7912 (not stamped with the part number, but correct 2/61 marking which matches 18xxxxxx 321 movement s/n), although it has incorrect and modern end pieces, rather than the no 6s it should have.

The problem I have is I hope down to my stupidity. As opposed to normal problems with bracelets being to short, mine is annoying slightly too long even adjusted right down on the catch. I need to remove a link, but the online instructions for doing this don't seem to work for my bracelet. In short, the spung links on each side of the catch should come apart by sliding a cover plate off from the underside of the link. All of my links including the sprung ones look the same, with no cover plate. Is this the wrong bracelet? Am I simply being (I hope) really dense? Any help with this would be really great.

The guide on changing the link come from here: http://www.old-omegas.com/bracadd.html, and I have borrowed a picture from that site to illustrate my problem. Removable links should have a plate as circled:


My sprung links all look the same as the rest of the links:



Other piccies to help with bracelet ID:



I have come from the world or vintage Rolex, so I have some experience with these things, just nothing with Omegas.

Many thanks in advance.

 

Heya Vlad, and welcome. Coincidentally, there was a guy trying to sell a 2998-6 with what he called a 7912 bracelet w/non orig. ends on this forum recently. I never saw if his photos showed the number 7912, but maybe it is just like yours. And I must say your member name is really neato. He also said he was a Rolex guy. You two have a lot in common. Please post photos of your watch for all of us to enjoy. The 2998 is a fairly rare beast. Do you have any photos of the movement?

 

I noticed the 'for sale' advertisement when looking through the forum before posting. No, I did not buy this chap's watch. I got mine privately from a guy quite near me in the UK.

Please see below for some pictures of the watch itself on a leather strap. I believe it is a good, honest example - not perfect as you would expect. Not knowing enough about what to look for with these, I am naturally suspicious of watches that look too good and are unpolished at 50 years old....

 

No, you're not being dense! It looks like your spring links have been repaired using the 'non-sprung' centre parts that the rest of the bracelet uses. The only way to shorten your bracelet now is to gently prise open the centre link along its seem and remove the number of links required.
Its an early 7912, made before they stamped the number in the buckle and the solid links are all original to this model (they differ very slightly to later flat-link bracelets.) Nice!
Oh, and very nice Speedie too!

 

Many thanks for the reply. Just my luck! A good repair, as the springs are working perfectly. Just weird that the person repairing the links would not reassemble using the removable parts. Probably a technical reason I suppose. Thanks for putting my mind at rest about the weird issue. Do you think this detracts any from the bracelet? I was a bit worried about the lack of number stamping, but could not fault the bracelet otherwise.

Having worn it today and looked up what people have to say about the crappy quality of these, I think the wisest course will be to put on a 1125/680 onto it. I don't want to wear the 7912 out - and I can't stand to see it twist and stretch as I wear it even loosely. I have worn a lot of 50s and 60s Rolex sprung oyster bracelets, which can be worn daily if you are not doing anything too physical. Not so on Omegas of that age it would seem. One for 'Sunday Best' only methinks!

 

I don't think it detracts too much from the bracelet at all. Its very well done. Of course you can pick up original sprung links from time to time which you could use to replace them I guess.
The Omega flat link bracelets are a little light weight, but should stand up to light general use. The springs shouldn't twist or open in use, so if yours is I guess the repairer didn't use strong enough springs (the watchmakers trick is to use pocket watch mainsprings cut and bent to shape.)

 

I did not mean the springs - they are as tight as a drum. I just meant the whole construction of the bracelet. Even though mine is pretty tight, the amount it moves about with the weight of the head on my wrist suggests it is not particularly well made. Constant curving and movement in the bracelet is the curse of old (and new!) Rolex Jubilees. Because they are so lightly built they just stretch and eventually break no matter how much care you take. Oysters will last and last if you are nice to them. I have worn the 80s replacement Oyster on my Submariner 5512 for a solid 4 years and it is a tight as the day I got it.