Omega Bumper Unique Dial-All Legit?

[bsmitra]

Hi
Saw this Omega bumper Ref 2433-5 with a rather appealing dial in a strange way. Can the forum guide if this is all legit? Tried google but this reference wasnt thrown.

Any help would be greatly appreciated and a pic of similar watch.
Thanks

 

[JimInOz]

It appears to be, to my amateur eye, a redialed parts watch.

 

[bsmitra]

And why redial? Any indications like uneven print or creeping paint etc? Umless redial itself has been damaged!

Does these pics also appear repainted? I dont think so. Fungus yes, but not repainted.

Edited: Oct 31, 2023

 

[Spruce]

Given the very poor photos, it’s unfair to expect any OF member to provide anything other than a guess about this watch but, despite @JimInOz's modesty, I share his view and believe that the dial and hands suggest a redialled fantasy.

 

[bsmitra]

Spruce

Given the very poor photos, it’s unfair to expect any OF member to provide anything other than a guess about this watch but, despite @JimInOz's modesty, I share his view and believe that the dial and hands suggest a redialled fantasy.

Attached two more pics. Can you pl let me know pl.
Thanks

 

[JimInOz]

The accuracy of my evaluation is proportional to the quality of the photo.

I didn't look past the strange hand/dial combination.

Perhaps better photos will enable more accurate assessment.

 

[bsmitra]

Have attached two more closer pics. May like to evaluate pl.

 

[p4ul]

Is it 2438-5?

 

[bsmitra]

Yes, i was going to upload that only.

It is indeed 2438-5.

 

[bsmitra]

With the current pictures, I deign to think that its original dial, not repainted. Wordings are destroyed. But still I would like to know the opinion of the forum.
Thanks

 

[Tony C.]

I'm no expert on the model, but I would say that the dial and hands are very likely not original. In other words, a "franken-watch".

The hands make no sense with that dial. Can you find another example of the reference with such a dial? It does not look consistent with typical examples, nor with the period during which the watch was produced.

 

[Bruce235]

Lack of Swiss or Swiss Made at bottom indicates redial. I have never seen that style of minute marks.
The poor quality of the finish also indicates a redial that perished over time. The redial could have been done 50 years ago.
The words omega and automatic are so degraded that it is impossible to see details of authenticity, but again this points to redial.

 

[bsmitra]

Its feuille hands and makes perfect sense with the engraved lines on the dial, aligning with each line radially and barely stops short of the outer chapter ring (minute hand is bent). Also, aging of the hands and the arbor position seems consistent. Yes, similar dial we are not able to see. But similar hands on another 2438-5 is attached.

So ruling it out as franken may be premature; deficint on proof and sufficient on hunch as of now. Not having seen a similar dial would just prove the Black Swan Theory, IMHO.

Thank you for your considered views though. Shall appreciate more inputs.

 

[Bruce235]

The second hand appears to be a bit short for this dial as well.

 

[Bruce235]

Seems Movado used these pyramid indices in period, also 1980s Constellations,

 

[Tony C.]

B bsmitra

Its feuille hands and makes perfect sense with the engraved lines on the dial, aligning with each line radially and barely stops short of the outer chapter ring (minute hand is bent).

Perhaps it makes perfect sense to you, but I beg to differ. Take a look at different original dial designs of the same model, such as these:

https://omegaforums.net/attachments/20190602_164832-jpg.788021/

https://omegaforums.net/attachments/img_2335-jpg.719544/

The second and minute hands extend precisely to the second/minute track. The hands on your watch should either extend to the near point of the indices (especially the hour hand), or the far end. Extending the points to the middle of the tracks makes no sense at all.

B bsmitra

Not having seen a similar dial would just prove the Black Swan Theory, IMHO.

Sorry, but that is silly to the extreme. If a dial can't be found on other examples of the reference, the correct inference is that it didn't exist. I haven't done an exhaustive search, so I'm not saying that there is no chance that your dial is original. But assuming that it is original without a single supporting example is dubious, at best.

 

[bsmitra]

Tony C.

Perhaps it makes perfect sense to you, but I beg to differ. Take a look at different original dial designs of the same model, such as these:

https://omegaforums.net/attachments/20190602_164832-jpg.788021/

https://omegaforums.net/attachments/img_2335-jpg.719544/

The second and minute hands extend precisely to the second/minute track. The hands on your watch should either extend to the near point of the indices (especially the hour hand), or the far end. Extending the points to the middle of the tracks makes no sense at all.



Sorry, but that is silly to the extreme. If a dial can't be found on other examples of the reference, the correct inference is that it didn't exist. I haven't done an exhaustive search, so I'm not saying that there is no chance that your dial is original. But assuming that it is original without a single supporting example is dubious, at best.

Would the views of esteemed forum change with this bumper watch with similar dial, just difference being the subsecond?

It makes sense to me not because its mine but because of everything being in sync. Because a similar example may not have been seen cant be a reason for it being called franken. Now with this watch, would request forum's kind indulgence.

A dial of similar type wasnt found earlier but one day's search yielded one. I am sure there would be many other in private collection and hence not in public domain.
Once dial texture seems original, we should have give it benefit of doubt. But now it is seen, i think others would find more.

I would think of it as Black Swan moment indeed.

Thanks

Edited: Oct 31, 2023

 

[hoipolloi]

Bruce235

Lack of Swiss or Swiss Made at bottom indicates redial.

Wrong. Many old dials don't have Swiss Made.

 

[noelekal]

B bsmitra

Would the views of esteemed forum change with this bumper watch with similar dial, just difference being the subsecond?

It makes sense to me not because its mine but because of everything being in sync. Because a similar example may not have been seen cant be a reason for it being called franken. Now with this watch, would request forum's kind indulgence.

A dial of similar type wasnt found earlier but one day's search yielded one. I am sure there would be many other in private collection and hence not in public domain.
Once dial texture seems original, we should have give it benefit of doubt. But now it is seen, i think others would find more.

I would think of it as Black Swan moment indeed.

Thanks

Much better photography is required to make a determination.

I'm not an expert here, but that second watch doesn't prove originality to me, but rather that it came from the same dial refinish shop. The 12 o'clock pyramid is misaligned with the track line beneath it on the second watch.

The combination of the exaggerated length of the track lines with the applied gold markers is an unappealing styling effort in my view, even if it was original. That degraded dial being shown in the in the original post of this thread, with its unappealing styling layout, coupled with the uneven polish of that poor case's external surfaces makes for a mess of an old watch.

 

[Tony C.]

I agree with the above. Again, I am not claiming 100% certainty, but even with the second example, I remain skeptical.

And yes, better photos of both watches would be needed to assess originality with greater confidence.