Omega Speedmaster 105.012-66 CB - Bracelet question

Davidt

I don’t see a 1116 as being contemporary to a 66-CB. I’d say it’s a couple of years later.

Of course one could make the argument the watch could have sat around for a few years and the bracelet added at the point of sale but o think it’s very unlikely.

ACC1965

I lifted this from another thread. Couldn’t find the thread but luckily I made a screen shot (because I thought it was super useful)!

ACC1965

masteroftime

A great resource, however, I think it only represents the general rule and not the exceptions.

For example, some 105.012-65 and -66 pop up in the wild with appropriately dated 1039 bracelets. It depends on when the watch was produced. Also, there is some consensus that the 1175 was introduced in 70/71, however I suspect it may have been available sooner. It can be seen in ads (non speedmaster or SM300) from the north american market at least as early as 1968. It wouldn't be a huge leap for it to have been available as an option at the point of sale for some of the pre-1970 SM300 or -68/ -69 models. Most of the bracelets I have come across are dated in the 70s and were clearly added subsequently, but I have come across a few bracelets with early clasp designs and ambigious date stamps.

While I haven't seen it, I suspect it is possible that a 105.012-66 produced in 1967 could have overlapped with the introduction of the 1116 or have been paired with one at the point of sale. That being said, I think OP's 1116 was added at least several years later.

Usually, the ones that are often seen with replacement blades are the ones that came with this type of blade:

The little metal flap at the far left has a habit of breaking off and without it the clasp won't close. As seen here, there are three different types of clasps:

The first style (far left) often holds up and it is the earliest. Same style used throughout the 60s. The middle one often fails, but can be made usable by sourcing the old style clasp cover. The final iteration is more secure than the first iteration and less likely to break when compared to the last iteration.

TLDR. if the clasp or blades are replaced, it would have most likely been because it had the blades from the middle bracelet which is not the earliest iteration and unlikely to have coincided with a 105.012.