Omega 1972 Constellation gold 18k Dial Redial?

reziprozi · Jan 3, 2020

Hello friends,

what do you think about this watch. The dial I never seen before. I miss the „OM Swiss Made OM“ and the font looks suspect. Also the hands seems to be too thin.

the referenz is ba5661000150 but I found no information about it

Can you tell me something about this dial?

Thank you

Noddyman · Jan 3, 2020

No minute markers and what appears to be a cal 751 with no ‘officially certified’ on the dial. Seems suspect to me.

reziprozi · Jan 3, 2020

Thank you for your answer. The reference number is not clear to me. Some other opinions about the dial? Thanks

Noddyman · Jan 4, 2020

The first part BA 566 suggests: solid gold, lady’s watch, self winding centre second, water resistant calendar.
Nothing comes up in the OVDB when searching this ref.
Maybe it’s a cal 752 non COSC? Although a 752 would make it quite large for a ladies watch of this period.
I am not sure Omega even made a smaller day/date movement.
A bit of a mystery, sorry I can’t be anymore helpful.

Shabbaz · Jan 4, 2020

omega 18k constellation model 568014 with 18k bracelet?

Shabbaz · Jan 4, 2020

Dial is questionable...

reziprozi · Jan 4, 2020

The owner is the first buyer and bought it in italy. He has all papers and bills. I wonder, why the words „officially certified“ and „swiss made“ are not written on the dial

Noddyman · Jan 4, 2020

reziprozi
I wonder, why the words „officially certified“ are not written on the dial

Not all Constellations were COSC rated. Or it could be a redial.

padders · Jan 4, 2020

Cant say that I like it very much but it could well be straight. 566 means women's watch, self winding centre second, non chronometer, water resistant with date. The Chronometer text on the dial is therefore suspect. The lack of Swiss made is unusual but this being a ladies watch could be original. The dial would only be OM marked if solid gold, it might not be, many solid gold cases have brass dials.

It has a 28.8m serial so made circa 1969. Not sure if there was a reduced size day-date movement used back then for ladies watches, quite possibly, but as noted above by Noddyman, it could have a 752 inside* or the 25mm equivalent, whatever number that is if it exists.

On balance I think it is correct, redialled maybe, just not a particularly desirable to the watch collecting community who are predominantly male and often think less of integrated bracelet watches of diminutive size. If it were offered to me, I would be pricing it at scrap metal value plus a hundred or two. It's considerable metal value outweighs its value as a timepiece of interest.

*Were it a US market piece, the 750 movement would also be possible, but it isn't.

padders · Jan 4, 2020

Oh and another possibility is the the papers dont match the watch at all...

reziprozi · Jan 4, 2020

padders
Oh and another possibility is the the papers dont match the watch at all...

i think it is a menwatch.

padders · Jan 4, 2020

reziprozi
i think it is a menwatch.

Do you know with size it is? If it is clearly a mens watch then the papers make no sense. This kind of case design would be circa 40-41mm in the mens size ( it's very like that used on the SMF300 120m dive watch), if it is more like 35mm then it could well be the women's version.

reziprozi · Jan 4, 2020

padders
Do you know with size it is? If it is clearly a mens watch then the papers make no sense. This kind of case design would be circa 40-41mm in the mens size ( it's very like that used on the SMF300 120m dive watch), if it is more like 35mm then it could well be the women's version.

I will ask the seller

padders · Jan 4, 2020

Just bear in mind that if the papers are correct, a leading 5 digit on the case number always means ladies watch...

reziprozi · Jan 4, 2020

It seems to be a men‘s watch.

padders · Jan 4, 2020

I don’t think so. Omega introduced some much larger tonneau and cushion cased models at the tail end of the 1960s vs what had gone before. This is one of those styles. As I already said above I would expect the men’s version of this case to be circa 40mm. This looks very like what I would expect the women’s version to be. If you like it go ahead and buy it but the papers and size suggest Omega considered it as a women’s design. It has a lot in common with the D shape Connie hummer too. Those are also rather bigger than this one too at around 40mm.

Shabbaz · Jan 4, 2020

Shabbaz · Jan 4, 2020

Same right? Connie 168.045 18k

reziprozi · Jan 4, 2020

That is the watch in chrono24

Shabbaz · Jan 4, 2020

reziprozi
That is the watch in chrono24

Oh. Your watch is the one from chrono? Haha. Ok. Well. All of the other 168.045's i can find on the web have minute markers. Like you i can not find a similar dial. But that does'nt say it's not original

Omega 1972 Constellation gold 18k Dial Redial?

reziprozi

Noddyman

reziprozi

Noddyman

Shabbaz

Shabbaz

reziprozi

Noddyman

padders

padders

reziprozi

padders

reziprozi

padders

reziprozi

padders

Shabbaz

Shabbaz

reziprozi

Shabbaz

Similar threads

Request for Advice - Authenticity of Omega Constellation 168.004/14 (18K Gold)

First-gen Omega Constellation 2648 in 18k YG, cross-hair honeycomb dial, arrowhead indices, serviced

Vintage Omega Seamaster Special Dials: Collector's Guide

1972 constellation plus 40mm?

1972 Constellation Electronic f 300, is it good? Please help!

Omega Constellation DeLuxe Rose Gold 18k dial. Very rare in Rose gold