hey guys,

education continues... today, another 2998-62...........................?

seller lists it as 2998-62 --- from '68.

dial appears to have T's at the 6 o'clock position, so the dial must be from a later model. Still, applied logo and stepped subdials. I think the lume is gone, but I can't really tell.

bezel looks ok, DON, decent shape.

I *think* the hands are right, but possibly service replacements? they do reach all the way to the minute track, so i don't think they are from a seamaster.

If the blurry photos are right, I think the movement says 26..M, so that's definitely a later 321 and not correct for a 2998... however the caseback looks like it's stamped 2998-62.

I think it's a straight lug case too, but I'm not the best judge.

so what's the concensus? total franken? worth a punt (or at least going for better pics)?



As always, your feedback is very much appreciated!

thx,

J

 

Hi - the hands look as if they were from the "First Omega in Space - FOIS" that was issued 3 years ago.... as they fit a 1861 movement they should also fit 321 movements. I don't think there are replacement hands with "triangular lume". Also the small second hand seems to be from a FOIS... for a 2998-62 it should be just a straight one not a leaf one.
in my opinion the dial comes from a 105.003. I can not identify the number of the movement.... but it seems to be 265..... so it is probably from a 145.012 or even from a seamaster of that time. but this is just my opinion and I am still a novice.

 

Dial is wrong, 105.003 (T Swiss T)

Case has been lapped: not the extremely crisp edges on the top of the case but the case back and reverse of the case no showing the same 'unworn' condition

Movement is wrong: unless I am misreading the two digits visible of the serial number it is a 26 million movement dating it to around 1967/ 68 and certainly not the 17/18 million you would expect to see in a 2998 of that vintage

But I could be wrong

 

Its an assembly

Nice bezel though....

 

that is an interesting beast. Definitely the hands from the FOIS, bezel case and dial could all be 105.003's though

 

. It's a compilation. Even the sub register hands don't match

 

I think the sub register hands are the biggest giveaway that all of the hands are from the FOIS

 

Yup, looks like them is the hands.. a weird beast indeed.

 

quick question: what happens if an official company like "auctionata" (or another professional watch company) sells this watch "as it is" and does not state that its franken? i mean the "casual customer" cant be expected to do (and be able to do) all the research needed to detect watches as such He needs to trust the watch shop owner (being a professional) that the watch is 100% correct. I think that this is a part of the warranty that beside the "fully functioning" and "genuinity" the watch must not be fully franken - or at least it has to be told the customer if so. Moreover, i think that its also subject to the "laesio enormis" clause as the watch is sold for the price of a non-franken and worth significantly less being a franken - so its also from this point a scam.

what do u think?

 

I don't think Auctionata would touch this watch.

 

Lots of dealers sell them as "all original" meaning that they contain all original omega parts, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're original to the watch in question. And also, a lot of sellers don't know all that much about vintage watches.. they're often jewelers, not vintage watch experts.

 

If their watch has issues, sellers don't want to know too much.

 

You think so, but you don't know so. The OP's watch is a franken, but not a fake. They've even sold fake watches. The watch in this link was pulled once after I reported, but still popped up later and sold: https://auctionata.com/intl/o/82388/omega-constellation-black-dial-switzerland-around-1960.