Is this Omega Constellation listing worth getting into?

Posts
3
Likes
1
Hi Omega connoisseurs,

I'm looking to buy my first vintage watch, and I've got my eye on this vintage Omega Constellation watch listed on Marktplaats (Dutch eBay). It is listed for €1450 ($1707) but I think I would be able to bargain with the right arguments.



I really love the looks of it, and to my untrained eye the dial looks very nice. I also like the fact that it has an (supposedly) Omega strap. The seller told me that it has been serviced earlier this year. He does not know what material the case is made of (gold, gold-capped or gold-plated).

I've asked the seller if he could send me pictures of the inside of the watch case. He replied that he's no expert, but that he asked a jeweler that he knew to open it. He then sent me the following pictures:



Unfortunately the pictures are not perfectly clear. The caliber number is clearly 565. From what I can see it looks pretty legit when compared to images of this caliber on the internet. The reference number inside the caseback seems to be 14762 SC (61?). The serial number on the movement is not readable but starts with 2(6?,), which would date it to 1968.

I want to ask the seller for more detailed pictures of the inside of the case on which the serial number and caseback reference number are more clearly visible. But before I do, I'd like to know if it's even worth the effort or if I'd better let this one slide.

So, my questions:

  • Can you already spot red flags in regard to the genuineness and/or originality of the watch?
  • What other things could I ask the seller to find out more about the genuineness/originality?
  • How can I find out what material the case is made of?
  • What would you roughly pay for this watch, based on the current pictures/information?

Thanks you guys!!
 
Posts
10,350
Likes
16,202
See how it has T marks at the bottom but no apparent lume? Even if you don't have the knowledge yet to spot a redial, that is a big indication that this dial isn't original. And it isn't. The next concern it that AFAICS that isn't actually a Constellation case. Model 14762 is a Seamaster model so I can't explain the medallion other than to suggest it was glued in. Next, the movement isn't chronometer rated and next again the 26m serial (as you say 1967-8) and case -61 iteration are too far apart.

Run away screaming from this horror.
Edited:
 
Posts
3
Likes
1
See how it has T marks at the bottom but no apparent lume? Even I you don't have the knowledge yet to spot a redial, that is a big indication that this dial isn't original. And it isn't. The next concern it that AFAICS that isn't actually a Constellation case.
Thanks for the quick reply! I spotted the little T-marks but did not know what they meant, I most certainly do now.
Could you tell me what gives away it's no Constellation case, so that I can spot it in the future?
 
Posts
23,618
Likes
52,506
It's not a Constellation. The case is for a different model. We know because we know what Constellation cases look like and what Seamaster cases look like.
 
Posts
6,109
Likes
9,451
Welcome @RiesH.
You did right to ask.

I’m no Seamaster expert but isn’t this a Geneve reference, but with a beefy Seamaster mid case?
Seamaster movt and a very dodgy dial.
Not sure how they have got a Constellation medallion stuck to that caseback.
To sum up - this is a watch put together of parts - none of which are Constellation parts.
 
Posts
3
Likes
1
See how it has T marks at the bottom but no apparent lume? Even if you don't have the knowledge yet to spot a redial, that is a big indication that this dial isn't original. And it isn't. The next concern it that AFAICS that isn't actually a Constellation case. Model 14762 is a Seamaster model so I can't explain the medallion other than to suggest it was glued in. Next, the movement isn't chronometer rated and next again the 26m serial (as you say 1967-8) and case -61 iteration are too far apart.

Run away screaming from this horror.
Yessir! Thanks a lot
 
Posts
23,618
Likes
52,506
Welcome @RiesH.
You did right to ask.

I’m no Seamaster expert but isn’t this a Geneve reference, but with a beefy Seamaster mid case?
Seamaster movt and a very dodgy dial.
Not sure how they have got a Constellation medallion stuck to that caseback.
To sum up - this is a watch put together of parts - none of which are Constellation parts.
The caseback is definitely a mystery. I'm not sure whether the reference is 14702 or 14762, but it's not a Constellation case-back either way. So the medallion situation is interesting.
 
Posts
6,109
Likes
9,451
The caseback is definitely a mystery. I'm not sure whether the reference is 14702 or 14762, but it's not a Constellation case-back either way. So the medallion situation is interesting.
Ah!
14762 would make sense for a beefy lugged Seamaster.
- so the watch has one less errant part!

Do you think the ‘fabricator’ ground the seahorse off the case back before ‘applying’ the Constellation medallion?
 
Posts
23,618
Likes
52,506
Ah!
14762 would make sense for a beefy lugged Seamaster.
- so the watch has one less errant part!

Do you think the ‘fabricator’ ground the seahorse off the case back before ‘applying’ the Constellation medallion?
There does seem to be some damage to the ring, which could be from a tool. TBH, I did not realize that the size of the Seamaster "medallion" was so well matched to that of a Constellation.
 
Posts
218
Likes
455
Pictures of two different casebacks? Unlikely but possible.