Hello! For a while, I was looking for an Omega 30t2. In the end, I found this beautiful 38mm. According to my research, it was manufactured in 1939. I think everything is original to her! The dial has notes, but as the saying goes, complete happiness is gone! I bring it with great pleasure! We are interested in what the reference is and still more opinions if everything is ok? Thanks in advance!

 

Hi and welcome,

this is a very nice Cal. 30 watch and IMO it is all original - congrats!

 

The watch looks all correct and well preserved to me.

I'm not 100% sure about the hands, though.

 

These hands are 100% original for this kind of watch and era

 

Thanks for the quick response! I was hoping exactly mac_omega would validate and validate my opinion since I read here in the forum that it is a specialist in 30mm calibers! Being new, would you please explain to me the meaning of the term IMO! Also, is there any reference or can it only be obtained by ordering EXTRACT Of The Archives? Thanks again!

 

IMO is commonly used on this forum and means "in my opinion"

There have been several similar watch references at that time and it is not easy to pin one down if you don´t have one for comparison the number of which has been confirmed by an EoA.
If it is really so important for you to know the reference and you are willing to spend the money for an EoA then order it.

 

It doesn't matter to me, but I was counting on someone if there was one who knew how to help. Did I correctly date the year or does it matter when it was sold? Thanks in advance!

 

Very nice! I have the pocketwatch brother. Same «shy ten» dial, same hands.

 

@Donko1100 These watches are of particular interest to me and there is not much information around about the early jumbos. It would be great to get an extract to confirm the reference number.

This dial and handset combo would look appropriate to a Ck 2186, but that’s not the “case” here. However it is an appropriate feel for a late 30’s early 40’s watch, I just haven't found anything like this in my collected reference materials. The nearest analog would be a ck859 but your lugs are a bit different in shape.

The flat caseback is very indicative of cases from this early time period so I think it's all original and we need to know more!

 

I like the top ten as well as the thick eight!

 

Often referred to as a "shy 10." Very charming detail.

 

The lugs are also un-drilled, which is uncommon for that era.

 

[QUOTE = "Rman, публикация: 1493790, член:

The flat caseback is very indicative of cases from this early time period so I think it's all original and we need to know more![/QUOTE]
Here with the same case and hands. A little later serial numbers

 

Some had fixed lugs, some were drilled, some weren’t.

 

You obviously have a particular interest in these references. If you happen to know off the top of your head, could you tell me which jumbo references had un-drilled lugs (without fixed bars)?

 

@Dan S the ck859 is not a “holes” case, but perhaps some were drilled through later on at the owners request like the following example.

I had forgotten about this watch, but here an example with the likely the same case as the op but a “holes”case. Maybe the holes were added later, who knows? The serials on movement and case are very close to the op’s watch.

 

The case and bezel absolutely look right on that watch. I think you nailed it.

 

Well, if mine was with such a reserved face ...

 

Dear Donko,

I have a nice surprise for you:
I trawled through my photo archive of my collection and found a watch which seems to be of the same reference.

The serial numbers of my watch are very near:

movement: 58 lower than your´s
case: 40 lower than your´s

I was able to confirm my watch in the Omega archives as a ref. CK 859 delivered to Poland in 1939
@Rman had already a correct suspect concerning your reference... he has learned a lot (has done his homework on Cal. 30 jumbos)

And no proof without photos :



back comparison: flat bottom like your´s


profile comparison: lugs are not drilled either



face view.

IMO the crown on my watch is wrong and the h/m hands seem to be newer replacements, but did not bother to replace them yet. The thicker crown is much easier to wind and the hands have a nice shape, so what...

I am glad I could help (finally)

kind regards

Erich

 

Thanks a lot again for the work and the knowledge! Yours are with perfect dials as I wrote above! But I also like mine because it came with a patina, but also a lot of dirt. If it was just patina I wouldn't touch it, but in this case it had to be cleaned. It is good that there is a method that does not damage the dial itself.