Thats quite interesting actually.
I was just trawling through the dogleg thread while you were posting and your deluxe was the only pie pan that I found that also missed the MOY test like the OPs does.
His isn't a deluxe dial but it could have been produced by the same manufacturer towards the end of the 60s.
@Peemacgee when you're mentioning the failed MOY test, do you refer to the oval "O"?
The second and third pages of Desmond's MOY PDF ("It's all about MOY, except when it isn't") does show some 1960s examples failing the test but being original dials, so I suppose there are few but some valid examples
Ah, no.
The squashed O is a well known and quite common dial variant.
It’s true that, with a squashed O, while a vertical crosshair won’t properly bisect the O because of the shape, the cross hair will pass through the first peak of the M and kiss the right hand ‘arm’ of the Y.
It’s difficult to see with the OPs pics but if you draw a vertical line through the first peak it looks to miss the Y altogether.
Otherwise the general appearance of the fonts look correct.
It looks like @Noddyman ‘s deluxe dial might be the same
This watch was on the Recommended Vintage Omega thread:
My thoughts is that it is original and correct except for the crystal (no Omega logo), but a little bit later (1967) than most Ref. 168.005 watches we see.
I thought the price was fair but the cost to get into the U.S. would have been a dealbreaker.
gatorcpa
