- Posts
- 24
- Likes
- 51
Shazmak
·1171 with trapezoidal clasp sign and 633 end links was indeed available from early 1970's and also came with my 145.022-69 produced in 1971. The 1711 took over from the 1039 at that time with a period of overlap.
New in Omega Speedmaster 145.022-69
- Posts
- 497
- Likes
- 996
cell1010
·Are there more differences between 1171/1 and 1171 other than the trapezoidal logo on the clasp?
- Posts
- 497
- Likes
- 996
- Posts
- 2,876
- Likes
- 1,957
TNTwatch
·Well I have a one owner 76 with the second type clasp, and now a 74 has appeared in another post with the same clasp.
I can assure you that the 1171 on my watch is not a later replacement so I can only assume that the information in AJTT is a typo.
Unless you are the first owner and have absolutely never used the watch, I don't think you can be 100% sure nothing has been changed or added in the last 40-50 years.
- Posts
- 2,876
- Likes
- 1,957
- Posts
- 2,510
- Likes
- 3,729
rcs914
·If we look at this objectively it's pretty easy to determine that the trapezoidal Omega symbol 1171 bracelet was in use long before 1978. If it had been introduced in 1978 and then replaced by the square one in 1981 it would be quite rare, and it really isn't. It's not nearly as common as the later 1171/1, but it certainly isn't nearly as rare as the raised logo 1171 variant. So by process of elimination you can determine that the trapezoid bracelet was available for longer than the raised logo.
Of course the actual evidence of people whom purchased their watches in the early 1970s with the trapezoidal logo pretty much trumps all of that - including AJTT. It's far easier to believe that there is a typo in the book regarding this rather than taking it as gospel truth.
Of course the actual evidence of people whom purchased their watches in the early 1970s with the trapezoidal logo pretty much trumps all of that - including AJTT. It's far easier to believe that there is a typo in the book regarding this rather than taking it as gospel truth.
- Posts
- 2,876
- Likes
- 1,957
TNTwatch
·If we look at this objectively it's pretty easy to determine that the trapezoidal Omega symbol 1171 bracelet was in use long before 1978. If it had been introduced in 1978 and then replaced by the square one in 1981 it would be quite rare, and it really isn't. It's not nearly as common as the later 1171/1, but it certainly isn't nearly as rare as the raised logo 1171 variant. So by process of elimination you can determine that the trapezoid bracelet was available for longer than the raised logo.
If you base your opinion on your experience or what you've seen, I can also say that most of what I've seen with the -69 and -71, that I can be reasonably sure of originality, have come with the raised logo. Doesn't mean either your or my opinion is truer than the other.
Of course the actual evidence of people whom purchased their watches in the early 1970s with the trapezoidal logo pretty much trumps all of that - including AJTT. It's far easier to believe that there is a typo in the book regarding this rather than taking it as gospel truth.
Disproving AJTT is not difficult: just document all the sub-ref -69, -71 and -74 with a reasonably-sure-of-originality 1171 bracelet, and we'll see.
Edited:
- Posts
- 1,187
- Likes
- 1,859
sky21
·Is there any way that we can please stop this back and forth about these 40 year old bracelets? It's not really getting anywhere and just seems like useless bickering. @TNTwatch actually posted a photo from a part of AJTT that states in print that the trapezoidal logo 1171 wasn't released until 1978. Could that be a mistake, of course, but not just because someone says it is. I agree with others who have posted that they think it was released earlier than 1978 but I can't prove that since they weren't dated on the clasp like the 1175 bracelets were.
Please, someone post a photo of an original, one-owner watch from the early 70's that came with a 1171 bracelet and let's see what the clasp looks like. And if you who are posting the photo are not the original owner than I'm with @TNTwatch and that doesn't really count.
Everyone likes to think that their Speedmaster is all original exactly as it left Bienne 45 years ago, but most likely it's not and can't be proven unless you actually walked out of the OB, AD, PX, or wherever else Omegas were sold back then with the watch on your wrist and the receipt in the bag.
Please, someone post a photo of an original, one-owner watch from the early 70's that came with a 1171 bracelet and let's see what the clasp looks like. And if you who are posting the photo are not the original owner than I'm with @TNTwatch and that doesn't really count.
Everyone likes to think that their Speedmaster is all original exactly as it left Bienne 45 years ago, but most likely it's not and can't be proven unless you actually walked out of the OB, AD, PX, or wherever else Omegas were sold back then with the watch on your wrist and the receipt in the bag.
- Posts
- 2,828
- Likes
- 4,716
dennisthemenace
·.
So what you're saying is that unless a watch is a one owner watch with a receipt, no-one can determine whether anything about said watch is original. That would make the thousands of posts regarding original lume or redials or serial numbers pointless because everyone would be speculating because no-one can ask the original owner. It would also mean that the info in MWO is just speculation unless the authors asked the first owners of each speedmaster referenced in the book if their watch had been serviced or modified in any way.
Is there any way that we can please stop this back and forth about these 40 year old bracelets? It's not really getting anywhere and just seems like useless bickering. @TNTwatch actually posted a photo from a part of AJTT that states in print that the trapezoidal logo 1171 wasn't released until 1978. Could that be a mistake, of course, but not just because someone says it is. I agree with others who have posted that they think it was released earlier than 1978 but I can't prove that since they weren't dated on the clasp like the 1175 bracelets were.
Please, someone post a photo of an original, one-owner watch from the early 70's that came with a 1171 bracelet and let's see what the clasp looks like. And if you who are posting the photo are not the original owner than I'm with @TNTwatch and that doesn't really count.
Everyone likes to think that their Speedmaster is all original exactly as it left Bienne 45 years ago, but most likely it's not and can't be proven unless you actually walked out of the OB, AD, PX, or wherever else Omegas were sold back then with the watch on your wrist and the receipt in the bag.
- Posts
- 2,876
- Likes
- 1,957
TNTwatch
·.
So what you're saying is that unless a watch is a one owner watch with a receipt, no-one can determine whether anything about said watch is original. That would make the thousands of posts regarding original lume or redials or serial numbers pointless because everyone would be speculating because no-one can ask the original owner. It would also mean that the info in MWO is just speculation unless the authors asked the first owners of each speedmaster referenced in the book if their watch had been serviced or modified in any way.
However, with a database and a lot of scrutiny from the community, it can be reasonably assessed to a high degree of certainty that a bracelet is original or close to be original to the watch, or not. Or let's just go with something simpler: compile a database of watches equipped with the 1171 of all types and go from there.
- Posts
- 1,072
- Likes
- 1,480
Dgercp
·Original owner would be too strict a criteria, and unless the original owner happens to be an OCD collector, his memory can not likely be relied upon.
However, with a database and a lot of scrutiny from the community, it can be reasonably assessed to a high degree of certainty that a bracelet is original or close to be original to the watch, or not. Or let's just go with something simpler: compile a database of watches equipped with the 1171 of all types and go from there.
- Posts
- 2,828
- Likes
- 4,716
dennisthemenace
·Original owner would be too strict a criteria, and unless the original owner happens to be an OCD collector, his memory can not likely be relied upon.
However, with a database and a lot of scrutiny from the community, it can be reasonably assessed to a high degree of certainty that a bracelet is original or close to be original to the watch, or not. Or let's just go with something simpler: compile a database of watches equipped with the 1171 of all types and go from there.
How many pre 78 watches with the trapezoidal clasp do you need documented before you admit that you could be wrong?
- Posts
- 2,510
- Likes
- 3,729
rcs914
·While I couldn't find a picture of one on a Speedmaster, there are watches as early as the 1974 catalog that have the trapezoidal clasp. Obviously this isn't any sort of proof. The Seamaster 120 "Big Blue" came on the 1162 bracelet from what I can find, and did have the trapezoidal clasp in the 1974 catalog (http://www.old-omegas.com/pics/caten74/p3435.jpg)
But it seems that the pictures they used for the catalogs had a real mishmash of bracelets on the Speedmasters - as late as 1976 they show a 1039 bracelet on a one in a German catalog (http://www.old-omegas.com/pics/catde76/p45.jpg), and also in 1976 they have a correct 1171 bracelet, but the watch pictured has a DO90 bezel and step dial (http://www.old-omegas.com/pics/spacestory/p34.jpg). And this 1973 catalog has a 1039 bracelet, with DN90 bezel and non-step dial (http://www.old-omegas.com/125years.html).
So utterly no consistency in their print advertising.
But it seems that the pictures they used for the catalogs had a real mishmash of bracelets on the Speedmasters - as late as 1976 they show a 1039 bracelet on a one in a German catalog (http://www.old-omegas.com/pics/catde76/p45.jpg), and also in 1976 they have a correct 1171 bracelet, but the watch pictured has a DO90 bezel and step dial (http://www.old-omegas.com/pics/spacestory/p34.jpg). And this 1973 catalog has a 1039 bracelet, with DN90 bezel and non-step dial (http://www.old-omegas.com/125years.html).
So utterly no consistency in their print advertising.
- Posts
- 2,876
- Likes
- 1,957
TNTwatch
·I've already stated that I own a 76 speedmaster with the trapezoidal clasp design, which I know 100% to be original to the watch, yet you keep rubbishing anyone that thinks the info in AJTT may be incorrect.
Questioning your belief or someone's belief is not the same as rubbishing or saying hogwash to someone's opinion without a shred of evidence.
How many pre 78 watches with the trapezoidal clasp do you need documented before you admit that you could be wrong?
I don't know what you base your belief on, but if you just put up a few credible sightings with supporting reasons/arguments, it would start a database that tips the balance toward your argument that it was a typo in AJTT. If it is just solely your belief, more than just one or two watches are needed to have some reasonable conclusion.
Believe what you will.
- Posts
- 13
- Likes
- 1
Speedio
·looks great. Love the dark chock hue... what was the bleed?
