Sorry to be the bearer of bad news: Although the numbers are matching on the extract this does not mean it is an original watch. The crown is wrong the hands are completely wrong these issues can be amended but will need a lot of patience as these parts are hard to source. The greatest problem is the completely wrong dial. Here the text "Chronometre" has been added later to a non-chronometre dial which has a completely wrong design/layout. these dials in original condition are made of Unobtainium! here is an original dial, in heavily patinated condition though - this is how a correct Chronometer CK 2254 Type 2 should look: You will find all these details in the book about 30 T2 Chronometers which I am currently working on - will be released in autumn 2018 (hopefully) best erich
I need to tell you that you are wrong my friend. I had contact to a Omega Chronometer Collector and he has a dial with same Logo-Omega-Chronometre variant and his one is NOS. I have sent pichture to Omega Museum together with my order of extract. The silver hands match the silver nummerals.
The extract confirms the watch reference (and case), and the movement, go together. The dial field has been left blank, because it is not mentioned in the records of the archive.
I am not stating that it is not a chronometer 2254 - read my first comment carefully It is quite simple: The microfiche in the archives does tell about the serial numbers and if they match - but it does not tell about the kind of dial which was installed. So the archives´s staff only check if the numbers are matching and then they release the extract - thats all they can do. They will not be able to tell you about the dial. To be able to judge these early chronometers CK 2254 you will have to do a lot of studies/compares because it is a very difficult matter. It took me quite some time to find out all the small differences between the 4 different executions (movements) these CK 2254 were made. The next variation of the dial was with the straight chronometre lettering and a 30 T2 SC Rg movement inside. I am sure Bill Sohne and/or Franco will chime in and tell you the same what I have written in my first response. And for your ease of mind - Alain (who is the curator of the archives) sometimes asks me when he is unsure about a dial execution or variant...
If you're able- it could help to post some clear pictures of your friend's watch with similar dial. It may help show the existence of a previously unknown dial variant and at the very least would give the experts more info to chew on.
Given that all of the known variations of this model's dial are all different from this, the onus is on the OP to produce evidence that "CHRONOMETRE" was not simply added to a 30T2 dial. Anecdotal claims are not nearly sufficient. And the macro shots support Erich's assertion, in my view.
I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that - just that the dial is not one that left the factory with the watch. If that’s the case then the presumed redial is certainly attractive to my eyes at least! Finding other examples that match yours would help to build a case that your dial is factory original.
