Forums Latest Members
  1. cvalue13 Aug 5, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393
    . . . is on its way to me: something about a black, starry dial on an all silver rig just says "constellation" to me. I'll be sure to add wrist photos when she's home.

    414a-big.jpg 414f-big.jpg
    414e-big.jpg 414c-big.jpg
     
  2. cvalue13 Aug 5, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393
    Now the board has me worried -- 25+ views and still no critiques, concerns, criticisms, croaks, condolences, or crying-out-louds?
     
  3. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Aug 5, 2013

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,627
    OK, here you go--

    Dial looks very nice, case is in good condition, but the crown is an incorrect replacement. I have some concerns about the different colors in the movement and it is very dirty. Hands are the correct length, but these generally have either black or luminous inserts. Bracelet is of the correct style, don't know if it is original as these were frequently added later.

    I hope you didn't pay too much for it,
    gatorcpa
     
  4. cvalue13 Aug 5, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393

    Now we're gettin' at it, Gatorcpa -- I've got a return deadline to meet, dontchaknow!.

    Well, first off I'd read elsewhere that the seller was knowledgeable and had good stock (perhaps this board disagrees?):

    http://www.corrvintagewatches.com/detail.php?productId=414#

    I suppose I'll wait to see it in person, and get your follow-on. Would love to know more about the crown and hands issues - while I'm certainly familiar/used to the inserts, it didn't strike me as a non-starter to be without them, though now that you mention the crown sticking way out there . . .

    I certainly didn't get it cheap (though also not for what's on the listing).
     
  5. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Aug 5, 2013

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,627
  6. cvalue13 Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393
    I
    I think that:

    (1), "my" watch's crown definitely is not recessed as is the first watch in the post you provide (or the version shown on the database for my watch - http://www.omegawatches.com/spirit/history/vintage-omegas/vintage-watches-database?ref=14650 ), but the second watch in the post does have the same "dumbo" looking crown sticking out also (so I still need more edu-mication on which-is-which and why, and how/whether to fix - but in either event think the recessed crown is more attractive); and

    (2) the first watch in the post you provide contains the two tritium "T"s, which "T"s are, presumably, with respect to the lume visible on both the post watch's dauphine hands and (it appears) also on the outer edge of the hour markers -- while "my" watch which contains neither the tritium "T"s nor anything on the dauphine hands or the outer edges of the hour markers (see new pic below), nor does the database describe this model watch as coming necessarily with lumed hands or otherwise. That said, on brief diligence, that when I typically see a dauphine without the "T"s, the hands have instead the "black" line accents, as you mentioned previously -- though the same does not seem to hold true with respect to much earlier constellations (which some dauphines have neither black nor lume).

    Another curiosity as that, for the 160.0004, the database describes the watch dial as ""De Luxe", with hand-rivetted gold hour markers and "Dauphine" gold hands." This is interesting because perhaps insofar as my dial isn't gold-accented (for what that's worth in the database).

    Omega Constellation Black Dial 036.jpg
     
  7. cvalue13 Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393
  8. cvalue13 Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393

    Finally, I'd also always thought that perhaps that the black "accents" on the non-lumed hands were a synergistic cost-savings item (which turned out to look great), insofar as the lume "divots" could simply be blackened in rather than having to produce two separate hands (with and without divots for the lume).
     
  9. Dablitzer Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    0
    Likes
    0
    I think that's a nice one. The black dial has some aged related wear, but its original. I like these connie styles, would like to add one to the collection done day. Enjoy your new toy, thank-you.
     
  10. cvalue13 Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393
    Having had a very pleasant chat with the proprietor via email, who directed me to Desmond Guilfoyle's blog (which I'd come across previously, but never thoroughly explored) and piece on "The Case Study." (http://users.tpg.com.au/mondodec//aCaseStudydefinitive.pdf) While more can be found, a few choice pieces of information brought to my attention:

    "The standard for all Constellation watches until ref. 168.004 and the C-Shaped cases is the ten-sided crown . . . . Omega has since substituted a round crown for the discontinued ten-sider, however, to repeat, all case numbers to 168.004 originally featured a ten-sided crown." So, the shape of the crown is correct.

    "New styles featuring round cases with both hidden and non-hidden crowns came out in the date model 561 under the case number 168.004." Now, several (but not all) readings of this suggest, that some such crowns were recessed while others were not. So, the position of the crown may well be correct.

    Now about those hands. Within "The Case Study" there are several watches having dauphine hands without the black or lump accent, each a 501, 504 or 354. So the remaining question is whether such hands found their way onto any 168.004's, in the "good" way.

    I've nothing yet to say, on the other hand, about the 561 under the hood.
     
  11. mondodec Editor Constellation Collectors Blog Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    843
    Likes
    871
    My article on cases could be a little ambiguous in that I didn't mention that the non-hidden crown model was 168.010. 168.004 models, in my opinion, are correct when they have the smaller hidden crown - not sure if it's available any more.

    Re the decagonal crowns, while I continue to assert that ten-siders are 'standard' (meaning part of the design story of pre third phase Constellations) there were exceptions, particularly in the US and occasionally in the UK with Grand Luxes. The clover leaf sometimes, but not too frequently, pops up in US ads of the period as well as one or two instances internationally. However, the vast majority of Constellation ads I have collected do indeed show the decagonal crown. So I believe it is fair to say that there were variances from the design story but, overall, decagonal crowns win the day.

    Re hands on your model, I can't figure if the minute hand just over-reaches the chapter ring, but if it does then I would say the hands are correct. I have seen many examples of faceted Dauphine hands on 168.004s where the chapter ring is located on the inner circle of the markers. But, I am under the impression that skeletonised hands with black inserts are really most at home with markers that have the matching black onyx inserts. Skeletonised hands are of course present with the tritium versions of this model.

    Cheers

    Desmond
     
    John R Smith and cvalue13 like this.
  12. cvalue13 Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393

    Thank you, Mr. Guilfoyle - very informative.


    Gatorcpa, looks like you were spot on about the crown!

    To return or not to return, is the question. . .
     
  13. Dablitzer Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    0
    Likes
    0
    I think you can find a crown, it might take time...but then, so does building a good collection! I think it's not a big deal if the crown wasn't original, think of the many years that watch has been around and to replace a crown, IMO, isn't a deal breaker.
     
    cvalue13 likes this.
  14. cvalue13 Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393

    I should also say outloud that the proprietor has been fantastic in correspondence on these issues, stating upfront in each correspondence that should I ultimately be unhappy with the watch he will immediately unwind the transaction.

    Also, he seems to have been at all times genuine in his beliefs regarding the watch; particularly given the proprietor's familiarity with Mr. Guilfoyle's quote from above (which I have seen interpreted similarly by others regarding there being both hidden and non-hidden 168.004s), absent Mr. Guilfoyle's self-clarification just noted above (which may be news to many other than Mr. Guilfoyle himself).
     
    Dablitzer likes this.
  15. Dablitzer Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    0
    Likes
    0
    I know the proprietor and he is one of the most honest sellers in the business and genuinely nice person. So it doesn't surprise me that he would offer a return policy and be so up front about it. That's how business should be done. Why have an unsatisfied customer? It should be a pleasurable experience buying something so steeped in history, and I also like that he offers some history, a back story about each watch. Makes for a more fulfilling experience IMO :)
     
    cvalue13 likes this.
  16. John R Smith Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    1,320
    Likes
    726
    It is quite usual to replace crystals and crowns. A bit like mainsprings, they are regarded as wearing parts of a watch which get worn as the years go by. I would far rather have a vintage piece with a new crown (of the correct type) than the original which was worn out. The watch seems completely genuine in all major respects.

    Regards, John
     
    cvalue13 likes this.
  17. MSNWatch Vintage Omega Aficionado Staff Member Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    6,528
    Likes
    10,780
    When dealing with a watch, look at dial, case and movement. In this instance, dial is original but has a lot of age and patina (personally for me too much); the case has some wear and polish but still looks ok; the movement has quite a bit of age (similar to that found in the dial). So condition wise the watch is at best average - sure the black piepan dial is quite uncommon but for me condition is very important and this dial has too much age. My take here is unless the watch was cheap I would personally pass and again, that's just my opinion.
     
    cvalue13 likes this.
  18. mondodec Editor Constellation Collectors Blog Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    843
    Likes
    871
    I concur with Mike in that it's best to go for top, you could say museum, condition. But one has to be willing to pay the premium that is required to acquire top shelf examples, and then there is the dilemma about wearing them and affecting their value. So, for me, those watches in my collection that meet the museum criteria don't get worn, and I often wonder what I'm missing out on in maintaining a "look but don't touch" regime for such pieces.

    Your dial has even patina. In any vintage or antique, patina can enhance, or indeed detract from, the value of the piece. If the patina on this watch was not evenly distributed, then I would want to pay less for it. The rules of engagement for black dialled vintage Constellations in the marketplace seem to be that 'pristine' commands a very substantial premium these days, and then there is a price continuum based on overall condition of dial, case and movement for like models in lesser condition. For rarer iterations of the same model or rarer models, rarity will set it's own price continuum and send the value for pristine examples significantly northwards.

    The other thing about patina is that different people perceive it differently, and in the global vintage watch market there are many serious collectors who see patina as a natural and attractive reflection of the life and age of the watch. That is not to say they don't recognise that museum quality is the most desirable, but simply that the various aspects of age on a vintage watch is sorted by an index of pricing and good patina can push the value up the index.

    In this case I would venture that a pristine dial on a faultless case in model 168.004 would be worth at least 2.5k US (global internet value) and would probably fetch more at a Christies, Antiquorum. etc., if properly described. So it puts the price into perspective, which seems o.k. for a serviced watch with a guarantee sold in through a B&M dealership in the UK , although you can get one a lot cheaper through eBay.

    Looking at the case, I think the pics don't really do it justice. I notice that the original lug chamfer is still there and so I say its above 'average'. The pics show the movement as average, although I don't see much in the way of burring of screws, and the blurry pics do make it hard to assess its condition. I would want to move the rotor away from the crown and ratchet wheels to see if there were signs of rust and also inspect closely the regulator for the same reason before I would be satisfied about the condition of the piece.

    Cheers

    Desmond
     
    TNTwatch and cvalue13 like this.
  19. cvalue13 Aug 6, 2013

    Posts
    3,979
    Likes
    8,393
    Desmond, thank you for your kind and insightful thoughts. Being new to this hunt, I must say that I've so far been a bit unsure what to think about what seems to be something like a 'museum mochismo' among many participants in watch collecting. It is nice to hear some self-reflection in the discussions.

    While I am new to this watch hunt, I'm not unfamiliar with the thrill of vintage - with respect to furniture, vehicles, light fixtures, etc., I've had plenty of great finds and bad buys. As it goes with watches, too, it seems (already). Bit one thing that, so far at least, seems different to me here with watches (as compared to say vintage vehicles) is the sometimes myopic focus on obtaining 'museum' quality at lowest, most brag-able, price. Don't get me wrong, everyone enjoys both a pristine example of a beautiful object, just as everyone also enjoys getting a pound for a penny. But at the same time, some beautiful objects -- often my favorite beautiful objects -- have uses as well, to which they were meant to be put. And, sometimes they present themselves to me subjectively in a way that distorts their objective value.

    I own a respectable 1966 Chevy C-20 pickup, and I drive it often, including hauling trash - because that's what it was meant to do, and do it while being beautiful. For the same reasons and to the same effect, I also own a 1962 Austin Healey Sprite, which I drive to work almost weekly. Neither are particularly desirable models of vehicles, and neither are particularly pristine, but both do what they were meant to do and their form betrays their function. Not that I wouldn't adore finding a $200, museum-quality 1948 Jaguar XK120. But, if I could never allow it to do its thing for fear of depleating it's monetary or historical value, I better first have in my garage plenty of other beautiful daily drivers. (Meanwhile, the sentimental part of me would imagining the things that '48 Jag would say to me if it could talk: "But, don't you know that in my day I was revered for what I DO while looking this good?!") This concept generally seems well understood in other vintage circles of which I'm more familiar.

    And so here I am, and I suppose also many other "newbies," for the purpose of stocking my garage of watches to be worn and enjoyed, and to tell me the time and date. They should work well, in spite of their age, though their soul must show through in occasional mishaps requiring extensive and expensive repairs - not the least of reasons being that, once in a while, you find one that seems to never quit, and only through your previous tribulations does this unbeatible example present itself as a truly special character. Also, if I can find them on the cheap, all the better - not the least of reasons being that it helps cover your costs when you find one that must be had no matter how over-priced.

    None of this is to say that I'm not still wildly underprepared to recognize what works well, or what is cheap in price, when it comes to watches -- and these forums have been a wellspring of information, by and for reason of folks just like yourself. But, as with vehicles, if I can find a watch that is relatively unmolested (correct engine, but new muffler and tires), that I'm not afraid to use respectably (a straight body at twelve feet away, but that up close has clearly seen a tree branch or two), and that I find so uniquely aesthetically appealing that I'm willing over-pay a bit (the old farmer is certain his pickup is worth twice it's blue book), then I'm doing what I came here for.

    Some other time, I'll develop a single-sighted focus on a trailer-queen of a watch (or ten), but first... what do I wear tomorrow with that blue blazer in order to remind me of the time and date?

    Cordially,
    Coleson
     
    TNTwatch likes this.
  20. SpikiSpikester @ ΩF Staff Member Aug 7, 2013

    Posts
    3,185
    Likes
    3,774
    Coleson, just to let you have another vote in favour of the seller. As luck would have it, I spent a big chunk of Monday morning with him and support Alex's comments about him. I have bought two watches from him in the past, he is very straightforward and decent.
     
    cvalue13 and Dablitzer like this.