MATCHING NUMBERS ??

Posts
325
Likes
165
Hello OF Folks !

I am a bit puzzled by the fact that I cannot find the Omega database that Desmond has mentioned in his detailed case study, which is supposed to enable to cross-check whether a specific caliber matches the case number ?
Unfortunately, the link that Desmond has put is no longer valid, and until now, I did not succeed to find it...
And so far, I could only identify the starting point of each caliber, or case model, but not its entire production span.

More generally, what does "matching numbers" mean in Omega world ? In the vintage car world, it is easy : same number should appear on chassis and engine - It now is also the case on modern watches : my '97 Speedy bears the same nr on case and movement. But what about the 50's-60s-70s Omega production period ?

So practically speaking, what about say a 168.005 movement ? How can I check if the combination of one housing a 564 bearing a '72 serial number is legit, except by asking for an extract of Archives ?

From the Calibre list, I can see that the first SS 168.005 housing a Cal. 564 was produced in 1962, but how can I check if this combination was still in production in 1972 ?
Thanks for your support !
 
Posts
12,967
Likes
22,491
On vintage Omegas the serial is only found on the movement, not on the case so there is no ‘matching numbers’. The check that should be done is to confirm the caliber/movement type is correct for the case reference and that the movement serial is in range.

I.e. a 60’s Constellation date ref 168.005 should have a chronometer calibre 564. The approximate year (either identified from the overall reference, sub ref, or any paperwork) should correspond roughly with the serial number charts.

The Omega Vintage Database gives an overview of specifics but is often incomplete.
https://www.omegawatches.com/en-gb/vintage-watches
 
Posts
325
Likes
165
Thanks for your valuable comments ! I shall have a look at this database 👍
 
Posts
325
Likes
165
OK, I had seen this overview from Omega on their web page ; I had thought that it would be a much more detailed list...
Any clues as to whether there is a reliable list detailing the spread of production for a specific model ?
I.e. : 168.005 started in 1962, and was last produced in ... ?
 
Posts
6,077
Likes
9,412
OK, I had seen this overview from Omega on their web page ; I had thought that it would be a much more detailed list...
Any clues as to whether there is a reliable list detailing the spread of production for a specific model ?
I.e. : 168.005 started in 1962, and was last produced in ... ?

Unfortunately there is no such end production information available.

You have to be careful how you interpret the production tables that are available as Omega tend to lump all similar references together.
E.G. the dogleg was first released in 1960 as the 14900 & 14902 (date) with the change of ref no. arriving in 62/63.

Actual examples from the first year of cited production are often (very) scarce - so you're likely to find 167.005 / 168.005 examples starting from 1963.

With 168.005 doglegs, the cal 564 was introduced around '66, so date examples before then (including the 14902) will have the cal 561movt.

It was thought by some that date doglegs with a 564 from the early 70s had a replacement movt but a sufficient number of examples have turned up -especially from the east - that it seems they were indeed produced into the early 70s.
It should be easy to spot these watches if they have black inserts, as they will have painted indices instead of onyx but caution should be exercised with any 70s movt dogleg.
Note: (correct) 70s doglegs are uncommon - but as time progresses we are likely to see more of them appear as owners pass them on

The 'easy find case and calibre matcher' is still working on Desmond's site.

 
Posts
325
Likes
165
Yes : this list given by Desmond is a real reference for me since the beginning of my Connie hunt ! It is a true help but again does not help to check whether a 564 is legit in a early 70s 168.005 SS case for example. Only option seems to check for further similar combinations on the market as you rightly pointed.