Hi guys

This is my first post here so please excuse my ignorance and inexperience when it comes to asking questions or seeking advice.

About a year ago I brought this beautiful Pre moon Speedmaster. It all looked good to me and came from a contact that I know and trust and to top it all my birth year (66) Which really swung it for me.

Time to share it with you and also to ask your valued opinions as to whether everything 'tallies' up.

The case reference number is 105 012 66
Cal 321
Movement no 24958####
It came on an Omega 1171 bracelet but at the moment I am wearing it with a black leather strap.
I have my fingers crossed that it is all O.K. From my limited research all seems to be correct. My main concern would be the pushers. They seem to me to be on the small side.

I would value your expert advice and thoughts guys.

Thank you in advance.


Nick.

 

Yes.....those are small pushers for the reference.
that would indicate to me that someone without access to correct parts alas serviced the watch, and I would want to have it services, or at least looked at by someone who does.

 

What is important is that everything important on your watch is still correct: the hands, dial, crown, case, bezel and caseback are all original and correct. Original crowns are highly desirable with vintage watches, and the original bezel (note the dot OVER the 90, rather than abeam it, as you find on current production Speedies) are both highly desirable vintage speedmaster items. The pushers are easy to replace with correct pushers. The serial number is consistent with what you'd find in a late production 105.012-66. You're good!

In the interest of full disclosure. . .original tritium on the dial is desired if present, and while I would personally not want it removed from my watch, given that it's gone from yours, don't sweat it. Regarding the original bracelet, the correct original bracelet for your watch is a 1039 with 516 end links.

cheers,
Mark

 

It's a nice looking piece. Congrats. It has the vertical facets that are unique to the 105.012. Here's a photo of my 2 105.012-66s with correct pushers (not original but replaced during service) flanking a CK 2998 with the small (original) pushers.

 

wish someone with the knowledge would put together a pushers reference post<hint>

 

Thank you for your replies.

So it seems everything is O.K. other than the pushers which are on the small side. Could it be that the pushers on my watch are the smaller ones seen on the CK 2998 reference speedy? Should I replace them with the correct pushers or leave as is.

Regarding the lume on the dial. All I can say is there must be some still there because the watch still glows in all the right places, all be it not very brightly or for very long!

Am I correct in thinking that the 1171 bracelet succeeded the original 1039 and that the 1039 was not very well made. So it would make sence that it would be replaced with the 1171 bracelet during the watches lifetime as it would be the next closest bracelet to the original?

I had the watch serviced about six months ago. I am now left wondering whether I should have had the pushers replaced?

Can anyone point me in the right direction as to where I might source the original pushers for this reference.

Thanks again for your comments and help.

Regards

Nick.

 

This is from The Master of Omega by Alberto Isnardi
CK 2915
pusher 4 x 3mm
crown 6mm

CK 2998, 105.002
pusher 4x3mm
crown 7mm

105.003
pusher 4.5 x 3.5mm
crown 7mm

105.012
pusher 5 x 3mm
crown 7mm

145.012, 145.022
pusher 5 x 3.5mm
crown 6.5mm

 

Thanks richardew.
I knew I was talking to you about the pusher reference

 

i believe the reference 105.012 came in two types of case, a push (friction) fit pusher and a screw fit.
The push fit version has shorter pushers.
i am away from my watches once again, but will measure on return.

 

Hi spacefruit - please do measure them when you get the chance and post your results here.

I believe the pusher evolution followed a back-and-forth turn on the Speedy Pro premoons:
[a] early 105.012s, up through and including the -65s that had screw-fit pushers, featured taller pushers (5mm x 3.5mm tall)
b] 105.012-66s had press-fit pushers that were short (5mm x 3mm)
[c] 145.012's returned to screw-in, taller pushers (5mm x 3.5mm)

In my observations, the 105.012's that had the cases with vertical facets on the lugs unique to 105.012-66's (and possibly late 105.012-65s), came with the press-fit, shorter pushers. The early 105.012 cases did not have vertical facets on the lugs, and these cases came with screw-in pushers. Starting with the 145.012-67, the vertical facets again disappeared, and the taller screw-in pushers reappeared.

As has been discussed elsewhere, Omega qualified multiple subcontractors to manufacture or supply their watch parts. I believe that not coincidentally, early 105.012 cases (on their caseback insides) were all marked with the HF hallmark, indicating they were manufactured by Huguenin Frères. The late 105.012 cases (on their caseback insides) were all marked with the CB hallmark, indicating they were manufactured by Centrale Boîtes. All 145.012-67 cases I've seen were again marked HF - so this may explain why the vertical facets and shorter, press-fit pushers appeared briefly.

This next paragraph is speculation, but I'm postulating the vertical facets on the lugs were an artifact of the machining process (perhaps even the individual machinist's technique, if they were handmade) CB used to make the case. And, it's probably a safe assumption that CB had a supplier from whom they sourced their pushers. In doing so, they selected shorter, press-fit pushers that matched the case (which they built for a press-fit, rather than being bored and tapped for a threaded pusher). As for why CB selected a press-fit pusher. . .maybe it was a supply constraint; or, maybe Omega's specifications were broader - perhaps giving a requirement for min/max pusher travel to ensure the movement is appropriately engaged by the pusher when depressed, a max pusher height to conform to enveloping watch dimensions, and perhaps minimum pusher diameter and actuation forces if user ergonomics were a consideration back then - but beyond this, Omega's subcontractor (CB) was free to meet the specifications in any way they saw most efficient and appropriate to do so.

Back to the point of this note - spacefruit - please measure and post your results when you get the opportunity.

cheers,
Mark