After seeing my First Omega in Space Speedmaster, my father-in-law nonchalantly told me that he also had a Speedmaster he got for his bar mitzvah in 1964. I immediately perked up and said, BRING IT OVER! Which he did...

He doesn’t have any original paperwork, and to be honest we can’t be 100% certain it was purchased for his bar mitzvah or up to years afterward. Here are some details I’ve noticed:

• It has a Dot Over Ninety bezel (though sadly quite beat up)
• It has an original 1039/516 bracelet
• It has twisted “Lyre” lugs
• The caseback has a single angle bevel, with the “Hippocampus” sea monster engraved on it.
• The chronograph seconds hand has a squared-off short end
• The Omega logo is printed, not applied
• The dial has “Professional” printed on it

I’m pretty sure the caliber 321 Speedies all had an applied logo…I’ve seen some sites say so. We probably need to open the caseback to see if it’s an 861 movement (and find the serial number). According to http://www.omega-addict.com/reviews/bracelets/, the 1039/516 was only issued with c321 Speedmasters. Buthttp://chronomaddox.com/omega/tables/mr/speedy_history_cm.html indicates it was also included with the ST145.022. We know that he’s never replaced the bracelet, nor has he ever taken it in to be serviced. (Amazingly, it still seems to run pretty well.)

If the watch was definitely bought in 1964, it couldn’t be an ST145.022. I suppose it could be an ST145.012, or even ST105.012. But then again, it should have an applied logo, right? Like I said, it's possible he got it later than 1964, but he doesn't seem to think so.

So what do you think? Is my only route to verify the reference removing the caseback?

 

It looks like a 145.022-69, which were available with the 1039 (those were available up to 1972, and are accordingly sometimes found on 145.022-71s). You could still get it opened up professionally (so as not to damage anything) to see what the serial number is, it's not outside the realm of possibility that it's a 321 with a new dial and handset but my bet's on -69.

Lovely watch!

 

Agree 100%, and if he's never had it serviced in 40 years it will most likely have to be opened by a professional.

 

Yes, good catch (I had skipped to the photos by that point!)

@cmenscher - probably best not to run it until you can have it professionally serviced. But don't send it to Omega as they will replace everything with new parts, which will remove all character from that watch.

 

Very cool watch! To answer your questions: the watch was definitely not purchased in 1964... even if you consider the possibility of it having been serviced and parts changed at some point, that watch as pointed out already is a 145.022-69, made no earlier than 1969, and which could have been purchased anytime within about 3 years or so on or after 1969. You did a good job breaking down the components so you've done your research. You don't need to open the caseback, its an 861 movement, and definitely don't try to open it, the gasket has vulcanized most likely and you will tear up the caseback trying. Talk to your father-in-law about getting it serviced, it should be given a sympathetic vintage servicing by a qualified watchmaker that understands how to preserve its originality, while at the same time, making sure its mechanically in good running order. It won't be cheap, but your father-in-law has an outstanding watch here and it deserves to be resurrected and enjoyed. Try to convince him to start wearing it again (and maybe you'll be in line to receive it one day).

Welcome to the forum.

 

Thanks, you guys! I just found this awesome series on 145.022's at Fratello...

http://www.fratellowatches.com/spee...ter-professional-145-022-buyers-guide-part-1/
http://www.fratellowatches.com/spee...ter-professional-145-022-buyers-guide-part-2/

Part 2 is especially illuminating. I guess the next question is...does anyone have a recommendation for a quality watchmaker in NYC that can service it without sending it back to Omega?

 

Thanks, repoman! It's a very special watch to him because it's one of the few gifts he still has from his parents. He says he doesn't wear it often because he doesn't like having to wind it. I think he's crazy, but I get it. I will definitely talk to him about getting it serviced properly.

One thing to note, I was struck by how light the 1039/516 bracelet was! Feels like a totally different watch than on a modern Speedy bracelet.

 

They're really lovely bracelets! I would swim in a pool of 1039s Scrooge McDuck-style if I could

 

Very nice! All the better for the family connection too.

Agree with abrod, probably a -69 judging by outward appearances. Get It’s opened up and let's see!

 

Check your PMs, it's the little envelope icon at the top right corner.

 

Great watch. A sympathetic service should really restore it to life.

Please report back if you ever find out whether it is a 145.022-69 or not...

 

You should have a manufacturing year and quarter stamped inside the clasp of the bracelet. It´s a clue to the reference of the watch

 

A lovely piece and so nice to have the back story too-as other have said. Yes please do keep us informed on what you find out from the service...will also be interesting to get your father in laws comments once he finds out it's a '69 piece.....

 

145.022-69 is the watch reference in question. Definitely take it to someone that is sympathetic to vintage watches. You dont want just ANY watchmaker working on it. Trust me when i say that! Ive learned from experience....

 

UPDATE: The 1039/516 bracelet has a 3/70 stamped on it! WTF? He has no recollection of ever replacing the bracelet, but from the sound of it that 3/70 means the bracelet was manufactured in the 3rd quarter of 1970. That would certainly mean the caseback should be at least the "The first watch worn on the moon" one.

 

Not necessarily - actually most of the straight-writings (the early "First Watch Worn on the Moon" variant) were produced in 1971. I have a pre-moon produced in November 1970 as well.

Your father-in-law's watch has its original bracelet, which is very valuable on its own, but together with the watch is something very special!

 

Note the date stamp is of the format QUARTER/YEAR. So, 3/70 means "3rd quarter {JUL-AUG-SEP}, 1970".

Typically the bracelet date can range anywhere from the same quarter as the date of production of the watch mentioned in an Extract of Archives, to (typically) a year or two after the watch was made. Note also that the date engraved into the caseback, can (and quite often is) a year prior to the date of production of the watch. For example, the 105.012-66CB I have has a date of production in 1967 (based on Extract of Archives) and the 145.012-67 I have has a date of production in 1968 (as reported on Extract of Archives).

So the date of 3/70 (and 1039 bracelet) definitely means the watch EITHER was not purchased in 1964, OR, it could have been purchased in 1964, serviced in the early 70s, at which time a worn dial and 1506/16 bracelet were replaced with service parts (but unlikely). This is likely a 145.022-68 or -69.

One quick way of telling without opening the movement, is if you chose to run the watch, the Ω321 calibre movement runs at a beat rate of 18,000 BPH, or 5 "ticks" per second; the Ω861 and subsequent run at a beat rate of 21,600 BPH, or 6 "ticks" per second. The sound difference is subtle, but once you've heard it for yourself, VERY obvious. Have you ever watched 60 Minutes on TV?? The 321 sounds exactly like the "60 minutes" clock ticking!! The 861 is a bit quicker, but you'll never mistake its tick for a 321 (or 60 minutes) once you've heard both.

See PM for watchmaker recommendation.

 

Really useful info g-boac-I never realised you could actually tell the BPH by just listening-Thanks!

Useful distinction in the context of 321 vs 861 also....

 

Reading these kinds of information educate me more and more , Thanks gentlemen .

 

Outstanding info, g-boac! I have an 1861 in my FOIS, which also beats at 21,600bps. So I wound both, put one up to each ear, and they are unmistakably the same. Although interestingly the vintage watch has a subtle metallic ring to each beat. So cool!

I did get your PM, thanks. I think the mystery will be settled when we get the caseback removed to get a serial number, find a date on the caseback, and actually see the movement (though it, umm...*sounds* like we know what it is now). But I'm not sure we'll go so far as to do an Extract of Archives.

I'll keep you guys posted.