I came across this at a trade auction, it's described as being fitted with cal 23.4SC, serial number dates it ca. 1936. It's in the style of the Medicus, with a railway style chapter ring. But it's fitted with a rotating bezel ring. Any opinion as to authenticity? Diameter ca 38mm. Not sure if I think it's kind of ugly or if the auctioneer's picture just sucks... but any thoughts or opinions welcome.

Lord, I suppose I need to buy the Richon book...a wince-making $350 last time I looked.

 

In AJTT, Richon describes it at pp234.
Omega "RAF" 1940. A military watch for aviators, steel case etc etc.

The one Gator posted is identical to the one in AJTT but for some minor bezel markings.

Your example has a different dial, different hands and no crown a 4.

I'd approach it with caution but wouldn't discount it until a detailed examination.

 

I wasn't able to get into the auction house to check it out first, so was willing to roll the dice online - estimate had been $375-450. It went for $1275...

 

Hi.
I have just bought this watch.
I will start a thread, I have never seen one like it, I am not sure what it is.
Thanks Mick.

 

Good luck with it! Should come up nicely with TLC.

 

Hi.
I have just noticed a thread about this watch I have just bought. It is quite unusual, I did think it was a weems at first then noticed the lack of the locking crown.
The click bezel has a ball bearing underneath, the bezel is also held in place by three tiny screws from inside the case, these screws are almost invisible once the plexi is fitted. The feel, quality and finish of the case is like vintage Omega if that makes sense but the case is not marked inside with any Omega markings. Everything about the watch feels right but the lack of Omega wording makes me wonder. Franken, prototype or some kind of MOD case.
The outer case back has never been engraved either. When I got the watch it was not working and had years of dirt inside the case like it has not been touched for many years.
I would rather not write the watch off as a franken straight away so any ideas? I do love the look of the watch. Do you think it would be worth getting a archive from Omega?
Cheers Mick

 

Hi.
I have started a thread about the watch.
Cheers Mick

 

Similar bezel marking at 12 on this bezel.

 

There are others with way more knowledge on this forum, but my own take on it - I also did research on this same watch and didn't find much info - is that it might be as well to get an extract from Omega. It doesn't appear to be a Weems, though, as it's missing the second crown (etc) and this points away from navigation to my mind.
As it has a 23.4 movement, I suspect it might be some variation on the Medicus (I have 3 models!), but there are only around 7 listed on the Omega site, and others here pointed me towards Weems rather than Medicus. I look forward to hearing where this takes you...

 

Hi.
I will keep you informed, I think a archive might help.
Thanks Mick

 

i`m not happy with the screw at 9, that holds the movement retainer ring in place........ that does not really look like original omega........kind regards. achim

 

The case looks huge for the movement and not branded Omega, so all a bit unusual. Still, even in the best workshop, screws go missing and get replaced with what's to hand, so... the movement is over sixty years old, after all.

 

And the hand set is consistent with Medicus hands of the period. Chapter ring is different on the two examples, of course, but still broadly Medicus in spirit. I enclose shots of two of mine, not at all the same as yours, but enclosed to illustrate the Medicus style further.

 

This is a bit like another watch we were discussing a while back (the cal 266, I think). Someone with access to a lathe and with watchmaking skills has turned up a brass spacer or distance piece to fit the movement into a larger case. The two original movement mounting screws fit into this spacing ring, and this assembly is fitted to the case. I think it is pretty moot whether the case and movement actually belong together. The movement serial number puts it into the mid-1930s.

John

 

The screw is somewhat moot, true, but as michael e is trying to establish if it is 'genuine' or a Franken the movement/case conjunction is the issue. That two similar variations proves nothing, of course, but it is a strange coincidence to find two such similar editions. But perhaps no more than that.

 

What we had with the 266 was a definite Franken - a 1930s case with a 1950s movement. Presumably the original movement had broken, and it was easier to substitute the 266 rather than repair the original. With this example all I can suggest is that you examine other samples of the Medicus and the Weems to see if they have a similar distance piece between the movement and case. If they do not, then I would be very suspicious of this watch . . .

 

Who know? It just seems too much of a coincidence that the circle with a line through it has replaced the 60 on the bezels on both watches pictured of the same era.
All comments above welcomed with thanks, I can fully understand all points of view.
Cheers Mick

 

I had the time today to compare this watch against a niad medicus I have just bought.
I am now 99.9% sure this watch is a Omega prototype of some sort. I have spoken with the Omega museum who cannot shed any light on this watch. The case back even has service marks from 1940 and 1941 giving the case a record of early use. There has not been one thing that has made me believe anything other than prototype.
Under the bezel you will notice the spring and ball bearing later used on the seamaster 300, the bezel marking at 12 has only matched up with another Omega medicus of a similar era, I believe if the case had belonged to something else I or someone I know would have been able to tell me which watch it was, any watch with a case style from this era would be known and collectable. The movement retaining screws on the niad medicus have the same shape head as the bezel medicus too, I know Achim noted this and I could see his point because I would have expected tapered screw heads instead of the flat headed ones on the outer spacer ring. What I did also note is that the rose coloured spacer ring does have a stainless steel nib on the same side as the screw in question it looks like this alone could have held the movement in place but over time could have worn a little.
The bezel is held into place by three tiny grub screws which I have never seen before, the plexi glass has marks from were it has rested over the space for the grub screws for many years. The watch pre dates all of the Omega weems watches I have seen so far. The inner case brush marks are exactly the same as are the machine marks on the rim of the of the middle case back. I wonder if Omega tried this style of bezel then adopted the weems style bezel?
I have no doubts as yet that this watch is some kind of experimental watch but to prove it is quite hard, I would welcome any ideas you have.
Thanks Mick