Hello, I'm new to this forum and live in Germany. I hope that I could find my answer that I'm looking for.

I own an Omega Speedmaster for 10 years now. It was my 30th birthday present from friends and family. And I've constantly looking through the internet to find out a little bit more about my watch. I have recently let it inspected at Omega in Switzerland. And also just have received my "Extract of the Archives" from Omega. Here are some informations from the document:

- Calibre: 861
- Movement no.: 32.XXX.XXX
- Watch Ref.: ST 145.022
- Production: 1971

The engraving on the inside of the back says 145.022- 69 ST

I've been going through many websites, but couldn't really find a concrete answer. I was hoping to get one here.
Is this an original assembled Omega Speedmaster? Is this what is known as "transitional"? Or are parts non-original parts that were replaced at some date in the past?

Thanks for your help!

 

Hello and welcome!
In brief for now: this is not a transitional Speedy, it's obviously a reference 145.022-69. And a quite beautiful one, your bezel alone is worth around 2-3k Euro.

Meanwhile check http://speedmaster101.com/ , you should get lots of interesting infos around your watch there

 

Man, that is minty fresh [emoji516]

 

mr_yossarian, thank you for the quick reply!

I've checked out speedmaster101.com. I could find the following informations:


"... the term Transitional describes a 145.022-68 with the following attributes:

• Applied Metal Logo Dial with long indices
• Low serial number calibre 861 (26m to 27m)
• Date stamped -68 in the case back.
• Dot Over 90 Bezel
• Spear or square end Chrono hand

I have see a Transitionals with -69 stamped in the back. I now believe that if a watch has the rest of the characteristics, including the serial, then if it has a -69 back it has the incorrect back. ..."


But nevertheless, the back/case and the bezel seem to be "pre-moon", right?
That's what confuses me. So, can I assume that my Speedmaster is not really genuine on how it is assembled at the moment? Or does it just not qualify for the attribute "transitional"?

By the way: I'm surprised and shocked that the bezel alone should be worth 2-3k!!!

 

I don't know about the value of the bezel but it's in great condition and the dial is amazing. Very nice watch...

 

Hi there,

Your watch is a 145.022-69 with replaced bezel and luminova service hands, fortunately the bezel currently fitted is worth more than the original DNN would have been (You have a DON which is too early for the 32M serial)

 

Sharp, thanks for your informations! That helps to know a little bit more about my watch.
Although I would have wished that the assembly is completely original, it won't hold me back from enjoying my watch.

I have to think about the non-original bezel. I'm not sure yet, if it makes sense to replace it to keep it as original as possible. I guess that it's completely an emotional decision. I'll see...

Thank you very much! That was really fast!

 

As for the hands: I asked Omega to send back the ones that come with the watch before they inspected it. They look more yellowish than greenish. Could be the originals. Seems like a good idea to keep these.

 

@perlunk
Welcome to the forum... A superb looking Speedy

 

It's a genuine -69 Speedmaster with some transitional attributes (such as the pre-moon caseback and DoN bezel), but it's not the model commonly referred to as the 'Transitional'.

The movement serial does seem late for a DoN bezel, so it may be that bezels were mixed up at an earlier service.

The hands may be replacements but they may be original. In a dark room, shine a light on the dial (such as the light on an iphone) and see if the hands and hour markers glow at a similar strength and for a similar duration.

 

I doubt that the bezel is a service replacement. The last watches fitted with the DON bezel were the 145.022-69s. A replacement would have been put on later and they were no longer in production The wear on the bezel matches the wear on the case. It has a beautiful dial.

 

@Davidt : Thanks for the tipp on the hands!

@richardew : Interesting!

 

The serial is quite high for A DON @perlunk , they were supposed to be fitted until 3059xxxx, when exactly was it delivered in 1971?
I have aquite late 145.022 too, deviating from the serial range for a DON as well, I bought it from the first owner ( I got the sales receipt, warranty card and extract that proves it all ) and it has a DON on it too. I'd assume yours was assembled with it as well, who knows if Omega had some left that were simply used, back then no one cared for DNN or DON.

 

@mr_yossarian Thanks for your input!

My Extract states October 13 1971.
I attached the document. (I saw some people black out the movement no. Don't really know why, but did it, too)

Unfortunately I'm not able to track back to the first owner.
That was an excellent proof for the authenticity of your watch.

But overall, it sounds like that there had been a period of time where we can't be 100% sure what is actually an authentic assembly and what not?! Am I right that there is no official Omega statement of what was used exactly for each serial number? We can just narrow down the probability by what has been seen on the market?

 

There have been a few -69s in the 32M serial range with DONs, I believe this is one of them and it is original. I suggest having an independent watchmaker reattach the original hands; with the replaced hands it's a great watch but with the originals it will be a real beauty!

 

Seems like that I had a lot to learn.
I did the light/glow test in the dark with the hands and dial comparison. The ones replaced by the Omega service are a bit brighter and the glow duration is much longer. The ones that were attached originally before I sent the watch in for inspection, glow exactly like the hour markers of the dial. I attached a photo of these.

So, I assume, that all you vintage people would prefer the old hands instead of the brand new shiny ones, right?

 

Those are beautifully aged vintage hands. Yes, absolutely, your watch will look even better with those original hands put back on.

 

^ +1. Lovely patina on those. Maybe have your watchmaker stabilize the lume (keep it from degrading further or falling out entirely) and then reattach them.

 

Good lord! What a wonderful birthday present! That is a very nice example of the reference. Welcome to the forum. If you decide to have the vintage hands fitted it would be great to see more pictures after.I agree with @oddboy. It's going to look even better than it does now.

 

Very nice Pre-moon Speedy! Those original Tritium hands need to go back on the watch STAT!