Need advice..Speedmaster 105.012

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

Hello Everyone,

I am a newcomer but have been searching for a while for a vintage speedmaster.
Recently I found below 105.012, from '64 to '66 I presume based on its characteristics: DON, close T Swiss T. Although bezel and dial somewhat damaged over the years.
But what about the dial, hands and the movement?
Your insights are really appreciated.
Cheers Tom

 

Posts

1,703

Likes

5,179

Screwbacks

·Apr 11, 2019

is this still under negotiation? or purchased already.

looks like legit to me. some characters like broken indexis are inherent of watch aging.

 

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

Reserved, waiting for extract of archives. Just wondering whether the damages in the inner side of the lugs are normal?

 

Posts

1,849

Likes

3,575

Dash1

·Apr 11, 2019

Tiethof

. Just wondering whether the damages in the inner side of the lugs are normal?

Well it’s not normal. Most probably a poor attempt at removing the bracelet in the past. At least you can’t see the marks when wearing the watch, you just need to ask yourself if it bothers you or not.

 

Posts

2,162

Likes

6,712

ATWG

·Apr 11, 2019

Hi Tom -as you point out, the dial is not perfect with lume loss and possibly scratches in the sub register. The hands look correct. The case is also correct for a -65 HF, but has been polished. The pushers also appear to be original fat neck. The crown is a later replacement. Lastly, the movement serial is also correct and appears to be clean.

The damage to the inner lugs wouldn’t bother me on this watch, the value is in the dial and bezel and therefore price should be appropriately adjusted.

Good luck.

-A

 

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

Thanks so far guys!

@abrod520
@t_swiss_t
@Foo2rama
@oddboy

I noted your feedback in one of the previous discussion regarding the dials of a 105012.
What is your view on this? To me the wording of 'professional' is a bit suspect in relation to the Omega logo and Speedmaster wording.
The Omega and Speedmaster format refers to early 105012, while the professional text refers more to late 105012's, e.g. de spacing between the two S's and middle bar 'E', agree?

 

Posts

2,162

Likes

6,712

ATWG

·Apr 11, 2019

You can conduct more research on Speedmaster101.com, both close and wide T's are acceptable for this reference.

 

Posts

384

Likes

686

stefman

·Apr 11, 2019

I don’t have much knowledge, so I’ll only comment on what I know. The crown is a replacement crown and not accurate to this model.

 

Posts

21,061

Likes

48,098

Dan S

·Apr 11, 2019

Tiethof

To me the wording of 'professional' is a bit suspect in relation to the Omega logo and Speedmaster wording.
The Omega and Speedmaster format refers to early 105012, while the professional text refers more to late 105012's, e.g. de spacing between the two S's and middle bar 'E', agree?

So you think the dial is fake?

 

Posts

11,816

Likes

38,306

abrod520

·Apr 11, 2019

Looks like it has correct parts and movement range for a 105.012-65 to me, the crown may not be a replacement - it's a 32-tooth wide logo crown which did appear on models in this era (though the exact range would have to be confirmed via MWO which I don't have with me at my office). Hands, maybe relumed? But they match and look fine to me. The lug scratches are odd but shouldn't cause trouble with the springbar fitment, though I'd still have a watchmaker look into it.

 

Posts

11,633

Likes

20,340

Davidt

·Apr 11, 2019

I'm in the middle of conducting some research into late 60's Speedmaster crowns and I'm pretty confident this crown was never original to this ref.

 

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

Thanks. I already checked various websites like speedmaster101, Fratello Watches and MWO. The dial remains questionable for me. perhaps a service replacement.

 

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

The dial of the watch should be the one below..wording professional not in line from my perspective..

 

Posts

21,061

Likes

48,098

Dan S

·Apr 11, 2019

Tiethof

The dial of the watch should be the one below..wording professional not in line from my perspective..

Your watch is the top one, with the oval "O"s, right? Where did you find the lower one with the round "O"s and the funny "S"?

 

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

Dan S

So you think the dial is fake?

Hi Dan, I hope not😉 not sure unfortunately..

 

Posts

17,639

Likes

26,756

Foo2rama

·Apr 11, 2019·Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can.

I’m not seeing a dial font issue. It’s not a service dial. As seen by the narrow T’s.

Pre 1969 the “service dial” would be regular production. Post 1969 when there was service dials this dial does not have the hallmarks of one.

The only service dials that exist are post 1969 321 dials. There are no 861 service contrary to some people’s thinking. ( yes I know this is a 321)

 

Posts

21,061

Likes

48,098

Dan S

·Apr 11, 2019

I think the OP may be making comparisons with the wrong dial. His post showing two dials above each other is confusing to me. It's not clear from his comments which dial is his, and which he thinks is correct.

 

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

Dan S

Your watch is the top one, with the oval "O"s, right? Where did you find the lower one with the round "O"s and the funny "S"?

http://www.moonwatchonly.com/omega-...ew-of-the-omega-speedmaster-moonwatch-105012/

 

Posts

21,061

Likes

48,098

Dan S

·Apr 11, 2019

Tiethof

http://www.moonwatchonly.com/omega-...ew-of-the-omega-speedmaster-moonwatch-105012/

Sorry, but your cryptic response is not helpful. I do not see that lower dial at the page you linked. Are you trolling me?

 

Posts

34

Likes

5

DogmaT

·Apr 11, 2019

Dan S

Sorry, but your cryptic response is not helpful. I do not see that lower dial at the page you linked. Are you trolling me?

I am sorry Dan, when opening the link, please have a look at the end where you can find the inscription. Cheers