Omega 2505 advice

Posts
203
Likes
106
Hello,

I would like your opinion on this Omega 2505.

The watch was offered me through a common friend by a well known collector that has purchased it last year from a reputable London dealer that is kind of specialized in these oversized Omega.

Thank you

Edited:
 
Posts
3,773
Likes
20,188
It's a lovely piece. Of course I know absolutely nothing about the value, etc.
 
Posts
167
Likes
224
Don't know much about this ref. but the crown looks smaller than it should be, maybe a replacement
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
Don't know much about this ref. but the crown looks smaller than it should be, maybe a replacement

Crown is fine as far as I can see comparing it with other 2505.
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
It's a lovely piece. Of course I know absolutely nothing about the value, etc.
Thank you.
 
Posts
21,395
Likes
48,570
Crown is fine as far as I can see comparing it with other 2505.

Those crowns are all more modern replacements. Maybe try looking at watches that are sold by more than this one seller, who aggressively "preps" his watches. When they are all so shiny, you need to be a bit careful. Or if you're determined to buy from him, than just do it. Otherwise, sit back and allow members to give their opinions without attempting to refute every criticism.
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
Those crowns are all more modern replacements. Maybe try looking at watches that are sold by more than this one seller, who aggressively "preps" his watches. When they are all so shiny, you need to be a bit careful. Or if you're determined to buy from him, than just do it. Otherwise, sit back and allow members to give their opinions without attempting to refute every criticism.

Thank you, all his 2505 had the same crown so I figured it should be the correct one ( I didn't consider the possibility that all were wrong though, probably because the original dealer is very reputable).

By the way I am not buying from him, but from a collector that last year bought the watch from him, as far as I know this dealer is also very picky, so I didn't mind about the very good condition compared to others in very poor ones I saw around.

Also, among his watches, I saw dial and case in different conditions, probably the one I am negotiating is the one in best conditions.

I am completely open to criticism and suggestions, otherwise I wouldn't have asked, I just replied to a member with few posts that for his own admission "don't know much about this reference" with my knowledge showing some pictures.

I suppose these are wrong too?
Edited:
 
Posts
13,436
Likes
31,599
There should be no gap, the notched space should be filled with crown, on the first watch the crown is too small.

The last one above looks correct.

 
Posts
468
Likes
1,322
This is the crown that came with the 2505:


Sizes:

Diameter - 5.35-mm
Depth - 2.25-mm
Tube size - 2.0-mm
Tap size - 1.2-mm - #6
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
This is the crown that came with the 2505:


Sizes:

Diameter - 5.35-mm
Depth - 2.25-mm
Tube size - 2.0-mm
Tap size - 1.2-mm - #6
There should be no gap, the notched space should be filled with crown, on the first watch the crown is too small.

The last one above looks correct.


Thank you guys!

A part from crown is everything ok?
 
Posts
1,318
Likes
10,654
Crown is wrong.
Thank you guys!

A part from crown is everything ok?

I'd want to see the dial under loupe, personally. Also that case looks quite polished in that light. Whole things looks a bit "prepared"
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
Yes, crown should be this:

Thank you!
So this are the measurements I have to look for?

Sizes:

Diameter - 5.35-mm
Depth - 2.25-mm
Tube size - 2.0-mm
Tap size - 1.2-mm - #6
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
Crown is wrong.


I'd want to see the dial under loupe, personally. Also that case looks quite polished in that light. Whole things looks a bit "prepared"

Thanks! My watchmaker has just inspected and told me the dial is original, not repainted or anything, but he has no idea about correct configuration, mark or anything.

Watch is from 1952.

Case probably looks more polished in the studio set pictures.
 
Posts
1,318
Likes
10,654
Thanks! My watchmaker has just inspected and told me the dial is original, not repainted or anything, but he has no idea about correct configuration, mark or anything.

Watch is from 1952.

Case probably looks more polished in the studio set pictures.

Not sure I would trust the word of a watchmaker on originality of the dial. I think the best is to compare macros with other known examples.
 
Posts
203
Likes
106
Thanks.

He inspected it with a microscope and he was talking about quality of writings etc.

Unfortunately I wasn't able to find any similar dials.

Sorry for the many questions.