Hey everyrone! I was wondering if anyone on the forum could advise on whether they think this watch is fake?

 

I don't think it's a fake.

 

I do think it was one of Omega's ugliest calibers though.

 

Not fake...

not really vintage, from around 1985.

 

That's fair! thank you

 

looks ok to me.

 

A lot of little gear syndrome in that movement.

 

No, it's not fake.

 

I too hate the look of the 10XX series, that paperclip regulator spring! Dark days indeed.

 

I feel a new thread coming on, but I'm not educated enough to start it - precisely because it all went blank for me mid-70s. The OP watch shows, more than anything, the understandable uncertainty and loss of confidence by the manufactures in those days. So, when and how do folks reckon the revival began? Either generally or for Omega? Hayek? Coaxial? Bond?

 

what? but it's got a gooseneck...

 

Do you mean a Swan neck regulator? A piece of bent wire hardly qualifies though I suppose it does the job. This family have their fans, I think Al sees some merit in them but touches like that and the general lack if finishing leave me cold. Oh the only one I had was a bugger to get fixed right too so I am naturally wary of them lol.

 

I think this movement has its place. It appears to be based on the Omega automatic of the era (calibre 1010) which was designed to be a slim automatic wind. Leave off the auto wind parts, make a few other minor changes by replacing the mainspring and barrel with a manual wind version, and the result is a manual winder without having to re-invent the wheel. I have the automatic version of this watch, and it is an excellent performer. I’ve never had a problem servicing them.

 

yes, my sarcasm didn't translate so well... yes it's pretty plain, as far as movements go.

 

This movement, like all movements, is a series of compromises. It was made very thin, and because of that there are parts, in particular on dial side, that can be prone to failure. This is in large part due to the design of the cannon pinion, which is a bit unusual and a design that many watchmakers seem to not understand or struggle with, at least based on the watches I get in.

A recent discussion on another forum where a watchmaker touted his 40 years of experience not lubricating cannon pinions is a good example of why these can be problematic.

The movement does tend to run well. It has a higher beat ate at 28,8000 A/hr, it hacks, quick set date, etc. So it has a lot of nice features, but was made at time when Omega was also battling the quartz watch, so it was "made to a price" as the saying goes. Objectively it's typically a better performer for timekeeping than the 55X series, but people clearly love those much more due to the aesthetics.

Cheers, Al

 

Sorry Joe, I should have realised. Your lack of Avatar meant unfortunately I took your gag at face value, a smiley would have helped! I should have given you more respect but fix that avatar and then we will all know you are a Pro