Omega Constellation 168.005 Pie Pan Turler Restoration

masteroftime · May 4, 2026

This is a great result. I was researching crowns when I came back across this thread.

Btw, your original crown may have been correct. Not sure if you’ve seen this thread:

https://omegaforums.net/threads/the-curious-case-of-controversial-constellation-crowns.54568/

Thread 'The Curious Case of Controversial Constellation Crowns' ·

Dear all.

As most know, the go-to crown for Constellations made in the fifties and sixties (for most references...) is the decagonal crown in its various sizes. Some advertising material shows...

ConElPueblo · Mar 13, 2017

A while back I had a full set 168.005. Original gasket and all. It actually had the same style crown you started off with. I tend to think it’s a correct variant.

Edit: strap was not original in the above example.

Peemacgee · May 4, 2026

The knurled crown in Troel’s thread is much slimmer than the one you show here and is an accepted variant to the decagonal crown in a period centering around the first few years of the early 60s. (For 14381s/14393s and doglegs)

The late 60s watch you show may have been ordered with a thicker knurled crown or it may have been changed but it is not (as far as we know) an accepted regular variant.

masteroftime · May 4, 2026

Peemacgee
The knurled crown in Troel’s thread is much slimmer than the one you show here and is an accepted variant to the decagonal crown in a period centering around the first few years of the early 60s. (For 14381s/14393s and doglegs)

The late 60s watch you show may have been ordered with a thicker knurled crown or it may have been changed but it is not (as far as we know) an accepted regular variant.

Fair enough—however, as to thickness, I think the crown in the photo posted by gatorcpa of a dog leg is similar to the one on mine and on the watch in this thread originally. I’ve seen the same crown used on at least two other occasions.

The prevalence just gets you wondering…

gatorcpa
The scalloped crowns are correct for the Ref. 14XXX models that were made pre-1963. I like the theory regarding the US market models on these, but I really don't know if these were restricted only to the US.

I have a fairly early 167.005 model with a scalloped crown:

It has a 21M serial number, so I'd date it at 1964. When I purchased the watch, I showed pictures to Desmond who opined at that time that he thought the crown was original and could possibly be solid gold.

I don't know if that is the case with this particular crown, although I have seen others like it on the Ref. 14900, which is the predecessor to the 167.005.

My guess is that solid gold or not, it was replaced, either early on by the original owner (the 10-sided crowns are difficult to use), or at a service later on.

Interesting to note that this is a solid 14K watch with the OXG code for US market.
gatorcpa

Peemacgee · May 4, 2026

Yep, have seen that but gator also says he thinks the crown on his watch was replaced.

gatorcpa · May 4, 2026

Peemacgee
Yep, have seen that but gator also says he thinks the crown on his watch was replaced.

I think, but I don’t know.
gatorcpa

Omega Constellation 168.005 Pie Pan Turler Restoration

masteroftime

Peemacgee

masteroftime

Peemacgee

gatorcpa

Similar threads

Antique Omega Pie Pan Türler Constellation

Omega 168.005 pie pan 1972. Fake dial ?

Omega pie pan turler crosshair 36mm 1964 with original papers

1956 Omega Constellation Turler Pie Pan: Legit Check

Omega pie pan constellation 168.005 thoughts?

Omega Constellation 168.005 Authenticity Analysis