I see there’s one in the WOK auction tomorrow.

 

Nice article. Note the last picture shown there doesn't show a standard 2254.50. It has had the Non-AC dial swapped in. The applied lume surrounds and AML are the give away. Or it could equally be a 2230.50 non AC with a swapped bezel.

 

A wee bit late to this article. It’s a wonderful and, as always, very thorough read. Not that I need it, but this piece adds a little more pride and justification to my impulse purchasing in 2008 of a shiny new 2254.50, my first Omega. Still gets a heap of wrist time. Thanks, Ash.

 

Extremely helpful article, reviving this one with a related question for @dsio or anyone else that might know. Other than by an Extract or if the watch comes with papers, excluding the bracelet on the watch, are there any identifiable markings to distinguish a 2254.50 from a 2054.50?

 

No there are none, the head of the 2054 and 2254 are identical with the same case number, 168.1640. Without the cards, only Omega or someone with extranet access would know what bracelet a given serial number came with. This is the same situation with 2255 and 2055, it's all about the bracelet. From experience though, I would say the number of actual original 2054 and 2055s is very small. Usually these Blake/Sword Hand models are seen on the Speedy type bracelet. In some markets, such as the UK, the Bond bracelet version wasn't even offered so some you see are likely put togethers.

 

Appreciate the quick reply @padders!

Just for my own clarity, is the case back stamp "168.1040" or "168.1640"? The reason I asked is that during my research of the 2254.50 / 2054.50 I found a number of "168.1640" stamped ones but no "168.1040" examples.

 

Typo on my part. You are quite correct. 168.1640. I’ll change it so I don’t I confuse a future reader.

 

Thanks @padders!