Omega Constellation 14993/4 SC-61 - Have You Seen This Reference Before?

Posts
8
Likes
3
Hi everyone,

I own what appears to be a very rare vintage Omega Constellation Pie Pan, dated to 1962.

- Model: Omega Constellation
- Year: 1962
- Movement: Caliber 561
- Material: Solid 18K yellow gold
- Reference number: 14993/4 SC-61
- Dial: Pie Pan with crosshair

The inside of the caseback is clearly stamped 14993/4 SC 61 - but when searching online, I find almost no information. Nearly all similar watches are listed under the more common 14393/4 SC 61 reference instead.

I’m curious to know:

- Have any of you seen this exact ref. before?
- Is 14993 simply an internal or transitional reference for 14393?
- Does it add to rarity or value in any way?

Any insight or shared examples would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance for your help!
 
Posts
2,034
Likes
2,792
Hi Mike, how about some pictures especially of the inner caseback?
 
Posts
5,990
Likes
9,275
Yup - pictures please.
 
Posts
8
Likes
3
Hi Mike, how about some pictures especially of the inner caseback?
Hi,

Unfortunately I don’t have a photo of the inside of the caseback at the moment, but a professional watchmaker opened the watch for me yesterday and confirmed that it is clearly stamped 14993/4 SC-61.

Here are two images of the watch, front and back, in its current state.

I’m planning to have it lightly serviced soon based on its condition (mainly crystal polish, gold cleaning, and a minor adjustment to the minute hand).

Thanks again for your time and input!

 
Posts
23,022
Likes
51,468
Assuming this is a serious thread, it's probably just a mistake by your watchmaker, or a "3" that looks like a "9". Please post a photo that hasn't been AI-modified.
 
Posts
8
Likes
3
Assuming this is a serious thread, it's probably just a mistake by your watchmaker, or a "3" that looks like a "9". Please post a photo that hasn't been AI-modified.
That could very well be the case, but I plan to have it opened again soon to take a proper photo of the inside. I’ll share it here once I have it 😀
 
Posts
5,990
Likes
9,275
The inside of the caseback is clearly stamped 14993/4 SC 61 - but when searching online, I find almost no information. Nearly all similar watches are listed under the more common 14393/4 SC 61 reference instead.

I’m curious to know:

- Have any of you seen this exact ref. before?
No
- Is 14993 simply an internal or transitional reference for 14393?
No
- Does it add to rarity or value in any way?
It would be rare if correct (unlikely) but no it wouldn't have any additional value, except novelty value, because it says Omega on the dial and not Rolex and Omega collectors, whilst enjoying oddities have a different view on their value
 
Posts
5,990
Likes
9,275
I’m planning to have it lightly serviced soon based on its condition (mainly crystal polish, gold cleaning, and a minor adjustment to the minute hand).
just be careful when asking for 'gold cleaning'.
The case is in a bit of a rough condition but it is substantially all there - and you don't want to lose anymore of the facets on the lugs as it will devalue the watch significantly
 
Posts
8
Likes
3
No

No

It would be rare if correct (unlikely) but no it wouldn't have any additional value, except novelty value, because it says Omega on the dial and not Rolex and Omega collectors, whilst enjoying oddities have a different view on their value
Thanks for your reply, I really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts.

I actually just found out that the watchmaker had mistakenly written a 9 instead of a 3 - so the correct reference is 14393/4 SC-61 after all.

Still, I’ve learned a lot from this discussion, so thank you again for your input!
 
Posts
8
Likes
3
just be careful when asking for 'gold cleaning'.
The case is in a bit of a rough condition but it is substantially all there - and you don't want to lose anymore of the facets on the lugs as it will devalue the watch significantly
Thank you so much, I really appreciate your advice!

I’m learning a lot from this thread, and I’ll definitely follow your recommendations going forward.
 
Posts
8
Likes
3
Assuming this is a serious thread, it's probably just a mistake by your watchmaker, or a "3" that looks like a "9". Please post a photo that hasn't been AI-modified.
Just to clarify, the images I posted were lightly enhanced for clarity, but nothing was altered or removed. Here are the original, unedited photos.

 
Posts
8
Likes
3
Just curious. Based on the current condition as seen in the photos, what do you think the value might be?

I know it is not in perfect shape on the outside, but it is all original, still running fine, and the movement is in excellent condition according to the watchmaker.

The only thing noted was that the minute hand could use a slight calibration.

Would really appreciate your thoughts or a rough estimate.
 
Posts
23,022
Likes
51,468
Given the current astronomical value of gold and the overall condition, the gold value will account for much of the total value.
 
Posts
8
Likes
3
Given the current astronomical value of gold and the overall condition, the gold value will account for much of the total value.
Thanks for taking the time to respond, much appreciated!