- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
Omega Constellation Gold .. probably 168.010...but
- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
reziprozi
·The seller seems to be very honest (works in hospital and the watch is from his father / first owner)...but could there be a 168.010 without minute.markers? On my research I could only find 1 on a auction
- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
reziprozi
·Ok...it could be more the ref 168.011 (hour markers are different)...and some 168.011 seem to have no minute markers. Has someone further information about this ref?
this thread also confuses me 😀 https://omegaforums.net/threads/constellation-de-luxe.19154/ the shown 168.011 is very polished and could be refinished
Thanks
this thread also confuses me 😀 https://omegaforums.net/threads/constellation-de-luxe.19154/ the shown 168.011 is very polished and could be refinished
Thanks
Edited:
- Posts
- 6,068
- Likes
- 9,390
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersAs you can tell from your search, these particular 168.011 deluxe models are quite uncommon.
it appears, from the only images available, that they were supplied with no minute haches.
they’re a bit of a strange fish stylistically, with the later style indices and sloping M / straight M combo in the text - even though they originated alongside the early iteration of the 168.010 reference in the mid-sixties.
To my knowledge there are no other 168.010s that have the dual M combo.
None of these particular deluxe watches appear to meet the revered MOY test.
the watch you posted looks to be in superb condition, it looks like it even has its original hidden crown.
the pics aren’t good enough to assess the dial properly - it looks good but it appears to have two sloping Ms (as I would normally expect on a .010).
On the info we have, to date, with this reference they should differ.
Do you have any other pics without the second hand tail obscuring the upper text?
Can you get better pics of the dial with the hands clear of all of the text?
The bracelet is unusual but has Omega marks - these were the customers’ choice.
Someone else may be able to identify the bracelet reference for you.
it appears, from the only images available, that they were supplied with no minute haches.
they’re a bit of a strange fish stylistically, with the later style indices and sloping M / straight M combo in the text - even though they originated alongside the early iteration of the 168.010 reference in the mid-sixties.
To my knowledge there are no other 168.010s that have the dual M combo.
None of these particular deluxe watches appear to meet the revered MOY test.
the watch you posted looks to be in superb condition, it looks like it even has its original hidden crown.
the pics aren’t good enough to assess the dial properly - it looks good but it appears to have two sloping Ms (as I would normally expect on a .010).
On the info we have, to date, with this reference they should differ.
Do you have any other pics without the second hand tail obscuring the upper text?
Can you get better pics of the dial with the hands clear of all of the text?
The bracelet is unusual but has Omega marks - these were the customers’ choice.
Someone else may be able to identify the bracelet reference for you.
- Posts
- 2,008
- Likes
- 3,386
rob#1
·I haven’t seen that type of bracelet, but like it with that watch, it makes a nice combination. I presume the bracelet is plated, is there a mark anywhere?
- Posts
- 7,805
- Likes
- 35,448
- Posts
- 6,068
- Likes
- 9,390
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersThe bracelet is marked 750 for 18kt gold, the other hallmark I can't quite make out.
Its just too blurry to read.
There’s an omega symbol with numbers below but I can’t make them out either.
Assuming for one moment that it starts with 82, (like the BORs) I’ve tried multiple combinations of, 23, 28, 83, 88 etc - nothing comes up in a search.
- Posts
- 7,805
- Likes
- 35,448
cristos71
·Its just too blurry to read.
There’s an omega symbol with numbers below but I can’t make them out either.
Assuming for one moment that it starts with 82, (like the BORs) I’ve tried multiple combinations of, 23, 28, 83, 88 etc - nothing comes up in a search.
I'd like to see a picture of the clasp with logo.It certainly looks like a nice heavy bracelet and not one I've seen before either
- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
- Posts
- 6,068
- Likes
- 9,390
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersWell, those numbers were a surprise - still doesn’t bring up any hits on google for similar bracelets.
Did you manage to get any additional decent pics of the dial?
Did you manage to get any additional decent pics of the dial?
- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
- Posts
- 6,068
- Likes
- 9,390
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungerswell, that case really is stunning and I was very much hoping that this watch would be the exception that proves the rule - but whilst it looks good from a distance, I'm sorry to say that, possible distortion from the crystal aside, I can't see Omega allowing lettering like that which we see here, especially those in 'certified'.
I realise that we are likely talking about different dial makers but I believe the letters should be serifed.
Below is an example of an .010 I've lifted from a Tom Dick sales post from a couple of years back.
I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong as this is an uncommon watch with an exceptional case.
I realise that we are likely talking about different dial makers but I believe the letters should be serifed.
Below is an example of an .010 I've lifted from a Tom Dick sales post from a couple of years back.
I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong as this is an uncommon watch with an exceptional case.
- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
reziprozi
·I have seen the watch live in person. The seller is first owner and has never touched the watch 😀
he seems very trustfull.
the dial looks perfect to me. Other opinions?
The dial looks much more clearer than the photos captured. The crystal moved the letters like looking through water.
sorry for my english 😀
he seems very trustfull.
the dial looks perfect to me. Other opinions?
The dial looks much more clearer than the photos captured. The crystal moved the letters like looking through water.
sorry for my english 😀
Edited:
- Posts
- 6,068
- Likes
- 9,390
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersI have seen the watch live in person. The seller is first owner and has never touched the watch 😀
he seems very trustfull.
the dial looks perfect to me. Other opinions?
The dial looks much more clearer than the photos captured. The crystal moved the letters like looking through water.
sorry for my english 😀
your English is fine!
I’d love others to chime in with their opinions too.
a couple of things to reprise for clarity:
These .011 de luxe dials without minute haches are a known variation.
To date, known dome dial .011 watches (and according to Desmond, @mondodec ) have the dual style Ms.
if the OP dial is correct and the rough lettering is just crystal distortion, then this is just the type of anomaly we expect (and love to find) from Omega.
(I’m actually rooting for you that this is the case)
However, I suspect you will need clearer dial pics for others to take the conversation forward.
- Posts
- 1,117
- Likes
- 1,789
Noddyman
·The font alignment in the three lines of text don’t match with any 60’s Constellation I’ve seen. It doesn’t look to pass the MOY test either. Also the M’s are very straight legged when they should be more splayed.
Not convinced myself.
Not convinced myself.
- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
reziprozi
·The font alignment in the three lines of text don’t match with any 60’s Constellation I’ve seen. It doesn’t look to pass the MOY test either. Also the M’s are very straight legged when they should be more splayed.
Not convinced myself.
Edited:
- Posts
- 6,068
- Likes
- 9,390
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersRight, but on Desmonds page he also said that the MoY test is not a 100% for sure test and there are some types of dials wich didn‘t match the moy test. Also it seems to be a difference between the 168.010 and 168.011 models there are many .011 models with the straight M. From the meeting withe the seller („buy the seller“) I can say for sure that he really never touched the watch. For example some other .011 models ... so much variations in my opinion
the (very few) known dome dial .011s have a sloping M in automatic and straight M in chronometer as per this second pic.
They don’t meet the MOY test as I noted previously.
The first pic is a redial, (straight Ms in automatic didn’t come until something like the mid-70s cal1xxx Connies. ) and it doesn’t have the classic indices of an .011.
It’s often found that owners may honestly believe that their watch was never touched.
However, it only needed for a watchmaker to decide to spruce up the dial at service, without the owners knowledge, for it to be done.
All I can repeat is, better pics of the OP dial are needed if you can get them - or at least a slightly different angle to show the ‘certified’ without distortion - fingers crossed they show a perfect dial.
- Posts
- 247
- Likes
- 89
- Posts
- 18
- Likes
- 17
Dinhhiep
·
What do you guys think about it, 168,010. I am a newcomer to ancient coins, should I buy one? Please help me.
- Posts
- 6,068
- Likes
- 9,390
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersWelcome @Dinhhiep
I’m guessing something In your post got lost in translation.
The watch looks okay but slightly polished - We would need better pics to be able to comment more fully.
I notice that you originally posted this in the ‘recommended’ thread With an eBay link, perhaps post that here too.
edit
You would probably be better off starting your own new thread as this one is about a particular variation of this reference.
I’m guessing something In your post got lost in translation.
The watch looks okay but slightly polished - We would need better pics to be able to comment more fully.
I notice that you originally posted this in the ‘recommended’ thread With an eBay link, perhaps post that here too.
edit
You would probably be better off starting your own new thread as this one is about a particular variation of this reference.
