Like many, I long harbored a prejudice against all the gold plated 321 Seamasters. I’d look them over and frequently rapidly dismiss them without a more careful examination.

Well, I’ve now picked up some of these watches and I’m actually quite pleased. One of them, see below, has become a daily wearer. It’s not perfect but I love wearing it. A 145.005-67



Here are the advantages of gold plated over gold or stainless steel:

1 - they are cheaper than stainless, often by $1k or more. Of course, gold can be twice as much as plated, or more. And there’s much less competition for the plated ones.

2 - they are more striking on the wrist than stainless steel, which can frequently be hard to read (silver colored hardware on silvery or white dials). I might not want to wear a solid gold one too often, but I have no such scruples with gold plated.




3 - the nice ones haven’t been over polished like the solid gold ones because good watchmakers knew not to risk polishing the plate away. Both stainless steel and particularly solid gold watches got polished, sometimes relentlessly. Much harder to find nice cases on those.

4 - Omega’s early 60’s gold plating appears to be a higher quality than many, based on my anecdotal experience. So, a high quality gold plated 321 can last years, or more if it’s in rotation with other watches.



Of course, great care needs to be taken when examining photos. But slight plate loss on the tips of the lugs (often the first place it starts) doesn’t automatically rule it out anymore for me.

Just my experience.




With bracelet, this was a little over $3k a few months ago. Considering what just 321 movements cost, this seemed like a deal.




For the people looking for a 321 Omega that have been priced out of the 321 Speedmaster market, this is a way to wear a beautiful 321.

Just sayin’.

 

@MSNWatch :

Beautiful!

Reference number? Estimated year of production?

 

You haven't changed my opinion, but you've done as good a job as I've read highlighting the positive attributes.

 

The case looks like very similar to a 2846/2849 Seamaster. I love it!

 

So long as you only harvested dead bodies and didn’t kill the living for their parts.

 

Feet of clay but a beautiful face.


Still a youthful heart: the movement before service. Not ready for the parts bin yet...

 

A seamaster 321 is definitely on my wish list but I have to say a gold plated one, not so much

 

I am hearing great things about replateit in Montreal bringing plated watches back to life for not a lot of money. The latest at https://omegaforums.net/threads/2-accutron-spaceview-restorations.98676/

 

Gold filling is not gold plating. The one pic of the bracelet shows it as being 14k GF (gold filled). Gold filling is a layer of gold that is mechanically bonded to the base metal, it is 5 to 10 times thicker than gold plate and can last many years, even in daily wear. 30 years or so is not unheard of. Most American wristwatches from the 20th century were gold filled and are still fine today. A gold filled case can be carefully polished with no harm.

In the US the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has strict standards as to what can be called "gold filled".

 

Thanks for this bit of info. I learned something new today!

 

Point taken.

I was just repeating how Omega described them in the casebacks: