Okay after more digging I believe:
1954 - 1956 (based off all of the serial numbers I collected in my research)
Sub second versions:
2754 (34mm hand wind) with 266 movement
2748 (36mm hand wind) with 266 movement
1956-1959
Sub second versions:
2903 (34mm hand wind) with 267 movement
2904 (36mm hand wind) with 267 movement
1958-1961
Sub second versions:
2903 (34mm hand wind) with 268 movement
2904 (36mm hand wind) with 268 movement
2981 (34mm automatic) with 491 movement
Centre seconds:
14702 (34mm automatic) with 552 movement
14703 (34mm automatic calendar) with 562 movement
14724 (34mm hand wind calendar) with 610 movement
2982 (34mm automatic calendar) with 503 movement
I believe based on the fact that 265 movements date to around 1949/50 these will be too early for these models as I understand they were released in 1953:
View attachment 979369
View attachment 979398
That being said this website:
https://www.timeline.watch/watch/1951-omega-geneve-ref-2903-8/ contradicts me by saying they used the 265 in 1951 on the 2903 case, although I can find NO other examples of this, AND it seems very strange to jump 5 years between this example of the 2903, and those that I managed to find examples of online. So perhaps the website is wrong? I guess it could be true that there were some surplus 265 movements and in the first few runs these were used, and whilst they were released in 1953, movements made 2 years earlier could have been used? So, in conclusion I think if we are to see these calibers, it would be within the 2748 case and be a very very early example, if not a pioneering example of this model.
There are of course anomalies like the OPs Geneve which is a 2748 case with 288 movement, so perhaps they're all just used interchangeably? Or perhaps this case was brought back with this movement to house the dials with the sunken sub dials, like his?
Of course I have no authority on this subject and this is just my findings, if anyone does have a greater breadth of knowledge on this subject I would really appreciate some kind of confirmation, or correction on my findings
Thank you,
Ollie
Click to expand...