Hello guys and gals, thanks for having me here. I have recently been offered a dial for a Speedy that I have bought and the seller claims that it is an original early 64 and not a re-dial in any way. I am suspect, I have tossed it around on FB and have had some mixed comments. The seller is reputable and knowledgable in the Speedy world. I feel bad about continuing to question him when he says it's a good dial. Can I get some help here? I am at a loss at the moment and don't know whether to continue with the transaction and I don't wish to offend the guy either.

Thank you,
Steve

 

Welcome Steve,
let me add something since we had the conversation that led you here: you should add that the seller offered you to install this supposed '64 dial on a 861 movement if I got you right? Please post a picture of the Dialback as well to see the feet on it.

 

Here we go...

 

He really needs advice, he had enough clowns over at facebook!

 

I remember a discussion on this sort of lume. IIRC it was decided that if this was a Rolex of similar vintage, no-one would question the puffiness of the lume. While it's far less common on Omegas, there are enough examples out there to accept that some lumes do swell.

As for the dial, lacking T's but with professional text ... I'd have to open the "big book" to check if that's right. I'm sure someone will have a copy of MWO to hand before I get back home.

 

Thank you guys so much, I really do not want to make a mistake either way nor accuse someone of wrongdoing if none exist.

 

There is, on 105.012-63s...but that's not what bothers me the most with the dial.

 

As per the MWO:

Type B1. No T (1964)
Main distinctive features:
* Professional inscription - ✅
* AML - ✅
* No Ts flanking SWISS MADE - ✅
Dial:
* Step dial - ✅
* Long tritium markers thru minutes scale - ✅
* SWISS MADE up against minutes scale - ?
OMEGA:
* Wide E - ✅
* G with long horizontal stroke 65% of width- ?
Speedmaster:
* S with incurving top loop - not clear on photos
* S and p joined - ✅
* m with rounded first arch - looks correct
* r with fairly low and short loop - looks correct

 

The printing lacks the crispness I would expect on an un-refinished ("original") dial, it is especially noticeable to me in the "Speedmaster" logo and the numerals in the sub-dials. Notice the sloppiness in the printing of the "2" in the left sub-dial. While it may well be the correct dial for that reference, I suspect it has been refinished. Not the end of the world if you can live with it.

 

I'm no expert, but if that dial wasn't reprinted, it looks like it was made on a Monday or a Friday. The "Speedmaster" text looks handwritten it's so blurry, and the twos in both subdials "20" are different and exhibit terrible printing. One is blocky, and the other is thin.

 

[emoji33][emoji33] is that the correct way of holding a dial??

 

No, I don't think so

In my opinion this is a restored dial. The writing was eventually damaged in some way and was restored by hand. Look at the "O" in PROFESSIONAL, or the Speedmaster text. I know a guy in Italy who does stuff like that by hand...

 

This is likely a redial.
It is a non standard layout - Pro+NoT's.
So it could be an Omega Service dial.
EXCEPT!
The font is non standard.
The lume is terrible. While I do see wobbly, or fat lume on early 105.003's, the wobbly lume has always been seen on Non Pro, T dials.
There is a large gap between the minute track, and the edge of the dial.

Note the arrows, which highlight the S in speedmaster, the poor 2 on 20, and the over fat lume at 6.

Compare the markers in the minute subdial.
1. is uneven and fatter than it should be, As is 2.
Compare 3 and 4, they are different sizes.



I would suggest this is a repainted Omega dial. I would not buy it from more than the value of the plate.

 

If this is the only way you try to asses authenticity then you really deserve to buy it. Open your eyes instead..

 

I have gone back to the guy and let him know, I have also invited him to join in the discussion as well.

 

Glad to finally get the second opinion here...that totally matches my previous assessment on a different channel.

 

Hopefully the buyer of this dial who was going to install it joins in this conversation, he said he spent 1300 pounds on it.

 

And that is why I love this forum. I never would have spotted any of that.

 

Only thing that upsets me is the deal that was going to happen, now wont, and I wanted this Speedy so badly. I was trading a couple of vintage Rolex pieces to the seller for his Speedy. Damn, damn!