Omega Military Watches - WW2

Posts
7,597
Likes
21,792
MWR is not always the source to go to..... there are not " the MWR guys..." ; there is no proof so far and it is only 2-3 guys there. i go with the stuff i can proof ; like the Omega Factory order form. without an order form, Omega would do nothing . i researched Military Omegas with John Diethelm from Omega in the mid 90`s. these here and some military issued Railmaster for the FAP and PAF. here is the original order form from the Omega Factory . nothing mentioned there like All Stainless steel.... just back and bezel ring. but, who knows for sure? turbulent times during WW2..... kind regards. Achim

I guess I must be one of the 2-3 guys in question if you’re referring to owners? Or just referring to the people in the membership who have « validated » the notion there are steel Omega issued 6B/159 watches out there?
and if not what makes you believe @pedrocarlone’s example is recased?
Is it just the lack of documentation ? Well there may not be documentation but I bought my watch in barn find condition from the south of France, before they sort of got « on the map ». my pics and the sellers pics.

That being said… I certainly do not claim to be an expert but I am quite happy with the watch, regardless of what anyone will say.
Edited:
 
Posts
230
Likes
158
I suppose the best way to settle this is to get an excerpt from the archives for my watch. That should tell me who it was sent to, the case material, dial etc and confirm or not wether steel Omega 6Bs were ever provided to the military. Its probably a worthwhile exercise for all the 6b collectors. Will send pics of the movement and inside caseback when i get home and find my tools.
Edited:
 
Posts
7,597
Likes
21,792
I suppose the best way to settle this is to get an excerpt from the archives for my watch. That should tell me who it was sent to, the case material, dial etc and confirm or not wether steel Omega 6Bs were ever provided to the military. Will send pics of the movement and inside caseback when i get home and find my tools.

I’ll be very curious and maybe I should seek one too. In any event your watch is really beautiful no matter what— that dial is just stunning 😲👍
 
Posts
230
Likes
158
Heres the one from mine above.

I see the certificate has the ref as 2292. Is that what the marking is inside the caseback or is it the long number starting with 102?
 
Posts
12,545
Likes
16,901
Is that what the marking is inside the caseback or is it the long number starting with 102?
2292 is the case reference number. It was not always engraved inside the caseback. The other number you are referring to, starting with "102", is the case serial number. It is separate from the movement serial number. It is not listed on the Extract of the Archives, which means that Omega likely was unable to cross-reference the two serial numbers.
gatorcpa
 
Posts
36
Likes
72
This is my 2292

Steel case back marked 2292 on the inside, non steel midcase. Movement number 9949917.
 
Posts
5,274
Likes
8,979
Heres the one from mine above.


So, only dial and hands confirmed as a special production for the British Government ? Is that a diplomatic way to say, the the pictures, you provided to get the EoA, show the wrong Case material, but are mentioned in the EoA as what it is, stainless steel ? Your reference 2292 has an special Alloy midcase , steel back and often a steel bezel and in Omega's database is wrongly described as full stainless steel. Your watch is maybe the last delivery to the UK , June 1944. That debunks the rumour, that only the first ever examples from 1942 were stainless steel...... That might explain , that the museum refers to their own database for the case material and cross reference in the books your mvmt. Number and case number/ case reference for the individual EoA.....have other members EoA's here ? What is written there ?
 
Posts
822
Likes
1,795
So, only dial and hands confirmed as a special production for the British Government ? Is that a diplomatic way to say, the the pictures, you provided to get the EoA, show the wrong Case material, but are mentioned in the EoA as what it is, stainless steel ? Your reference 2292 has an special Alloy midcase , steel back and often a steel bezel and in Omega's database is wrongly described as full stainless steel. Your watch is maybe the last delivery to the UK , June 1944. That debunks the rumour, that only the first ever examples from 1942 were stainless steel...... That might explain , that the museum refers to their own database for the case material and cross reference in the books your mvmt. Number and case number/ case reference for the individual EoA.....have other members EoA's here ? What is written there ?

It is very odd and I had never even gave it much thought when I received it.. here's some more photos.

 
Posts
36
Likes
72
@jaego. Has your watch a steel midcase? Difficult to see from the pictures.
 
Posts
822
Likes
1,795
@jaego. Has your watch a steel midcase? Difficult to see from the pictures.

I’m no metallurgist but it looks slightly more grey/blue than other stainless cases so I suspect it could be a “special alloy” as stated.

 
Posts
36
Likes
72
The special alloy is quite fragile and very light weighted.
 
Posts
675
Likes
1,196
Jaegodylan's watch says "fond acier inoxydable" inside the case back so it is not a stainless midcase, but some other type of alloy.
 
Posts
36
Likes
72
I believe the inside of the case back says only something about the case back itself. Both the steel and the alloy mid cases have stainless steel case backs.
 
Posts
36
Likes
72
My midcase is alloy, Syrte's is stainless steel. Based on the pictures I would assume yours is alloy too. I think you can sense it by ticking with your nail against the lug. It feels lighter, less dense, less robust
 
Posts
2,555
Likes
5,605
I believe the inside of the case back says only something about the case back itself. Both the steel and the alloy mid cases have stainless steel case backs.
It’s the extra word “fond” that makes the difference. Those without are typically all stainless, those with will have a stainless caseback but the midcase is alloy, plated, etc.
Edited:
 
Posts
36
Likes
72
It’s the extra word “fond” that makes the difference. Those without are typically all stainless, those with will have a stainless caseback but the midcase is alloy, plated, etc.
That makes a lot of sense. Stupid of me
 
Posts
375
Likes
575
I don't get it, I can't access MWR. Any ideas how to bypass this?


Yes, you have to join. We recently made it "members' only", viewable only to those with accounts. The rise in prices of mil watches has led to all sorts of scammers and chancers so it's to protect the information, images etc on there,

HTH