Hi everyone,

Hope everyone is doing well.

I picked up this 1943 handwound Omega. The caseback refers to it as a 2179/2. Overall the watch seems to be in great condition. However, I am unsure as to whether the dial is original. I personally think it is, but can’t seem to find a similar 2179/2 with this dial configuration.

Any thoughts?

Kind regards

 

Not sure if it's original to this ref. but it's a good looking dial/watch and I wouldn't be surprised if it is.
@mac_omega @Tire-comedon @MSNWatch @watchyouwant or some of the other experts will let you know soon I'm sure..

 

It seems to be a civilian version of the military chronometer 2179. The numerals are in roman and the case reference is 2179/2. According to Erichs book "30 mm chronometer" @mac_omega the sub references 3 and 5 normally were used for the U.S.ARMY editions.

I asses the watch as genuine in all parts.

 

Gorgeous watch though. Just beautiful and if it is original that is even better. Good luck.

 

I really like the looks as well! Is going to my watchmaker tomorrow for a service as it has been in laying in a drawer for 20 years.

 

Normally the dial of a 2179 looks like this

But I also found some variations look quite nice too. Not sure if it is original or frankened.

 

Have seen that dial before. Looks fine to me. Kind regards. Achim

 

Hard to say......these were manufactured at the end of WW2, delivered too late 1945 . Then came to the US Army in Germany and extremely fine engraved US Army for 2 subreferences. The surplus from that big order was for sale, with the Army Dial and Swiss Made next to the 6, in the PX. Same case came on the market with many different dials , but should have Swiss Made ( I think....) . The dial looks good to me, but it seems odd in this case with these hands. My guess is, that this dial is earlier...... kind regards. Achim

 

The dial looks wrong because it is being severely cut off around the edges. I can't tell if that's because it's actually wrong or because the tension ring is far too wide.

 

Thanks for the response.

I did manage to find this example which is also a 2179:


Dial layout looks quite similar except for the color.

 

What do you mean by it being cut off? As far as I can tell from other examples (with different dial lay outs), all dials seem to be cut off in the sense that the print is not fully extending to the edge, leaving some 'blank' space around the edges.

 

My point is that you're not able to see the full dial on the OP watch because the retaining ring is too wide.

 

Sorry, I don't see it, or in this case do see it. The dial appears fully visible, at least to me, with a printed line at the edge of the numerals, red arrow, which perhaps you are interpreting as the edge of the retaining ring. The area between the yellow arrows looks like the dial surface, not a retaining ring. Is there more of the dial that you think is missing?

 

You're right, I was misinterpreting the photo. Apologies.

 

So I guess no conclusive answer as of yet.

 

I’ve asked my watchmaker to take some pictures of the dial without the glass so we should know for sure.

 

Took some time but here’s a picture of the dial. During the service some lume from the hour hand fell out unfortunately.

 

I have a 30T2 dresswatch, a 2325 with a similar dial where the Romans are mirrored rather than radium, that doesn’t necessarily mean it was never put into a 2179 case but it’s anecdotal. Interestingly my minute hand crosses the minute track as well, something I’ve seen in other Omega pieces from the 40’s/50’s so that’s neither here nor there.

Usually when I’m looking for a dial transplant I’m looking for the stain ring around the edge and whether that line is visible inside the rehaut, on a transplanted dial often it is. A closer look of how the case and crystal lines up with that stain ring on your dial would be a good indicator.

On my image the line IS the rehaut.


You can’t see in the photo above because of the glare, but my minute hand reaches the outside of the Roman track exactly like yours does.