On Ebay, I won a Speedie 145.022-69.....But it looks strange?? Opinions Please!!

alam · Jul 4, 2015

marturx
That "Speedy" is really bad news. Save your money and stay out

I suspect the train has left the station for your advice..☕

gemini4 · Jul 4, 2015

marturx
That "Speedy" is really bad news. Save your money and stay out

What exactly is "really bad" about it?

gemini4 · Jul 4, 2015

alam
I suspect the train has left the station for your advice..☕

Not exactly. The watch is bought, paid for but returnable within 2 weeks. The seller appears reliable with a solid eBay rating.
My total exposure......$20 round trip postage.
What have I learned thus far?
The watch has a unique dial.
The watch has a, perhaps, a 7 digit serial number.
The fuzzy, DON bezel is worn. The numbers are blotchy and resembles other bezels seen previously. Another believes the bezel is an aged, modern replacement.

So far I'm getting a pretty good run for my $20 bucks.

Davidt · Jul 4, 2015

A few things don't look right.

The bezel has some warning flags-is it a repro?
Case is polished.
No T's on the dial. A deliberately aged service dial? Redial? All out fake?
Some of the movement parts are different shades of copper and there's the issue with the no. Which suggests it may have been put together.

Plus overall, it looks like a bit of a dog.

Id give some serious thought to returning it as you can get much better for the same price.

alam · Jul 4, 2015

Gemini4
So far I'm getting a pretty good run for my $20 bucks.

..and at the end, this is really what matters - how you feel and not anyone else. 👍

gemini4 · Jul 4, 2015

The dial is not a modern service dial since it is raised and the Swiss Made is a different alignment unlike any in MWO.
If this is a much older service dial, I'd be very interested to find out more info.
Since raised dials were not issued since the 145.022-71, perhaps this an old, seldom used, dial.

Could be a redial. I hope not.

Davidt · Jul 4, 2015

I think any genuine dial with a painted logo would have T's until superluminova came in. Wasn't it law.

Therefore it must either be repainted or fake if it has a step. I can't see the step on my phone though.

gemini4 · Jul 4, 2015

Davidt3449
I think any genuine dial with a painted logo would have T's until superluminova came in. Wasn't it law.

Therefore it must either be repainted or fake if it has a step. I can't see the step on my phone though.

You could be correct about the repainting but the step is fairly visible in one of the pics.
It doesn't make much sense to me why someone would repaint a raised dial for a watch that shouldn't have a raised dial. I've seen dials where the Ts have been painted over. I've never seen one where the Swiss Made was redone.

Davidt · Jul 4, 2015

A '69 should have a step dial.

Edit: or do you mean you think the dial originally had a raised logo??

gemini4 · Jul 4, 2015

Davidt3449
A '69 should have a step dial.

Edit: or do you mean you think the dial originally had a raised logo??

Sorry, you are absolutely correct. Mixed upped the stepped vs the logo. My bad

TNTwatch · Jul 5, 2015

Some addional notes to what's been said:

Bezel is wrong, beside dot below 70, every letter in TACHYMÈTRE is of wrong font. And bad print quality.

Dial has wrong symbol, wrong Omega font type, wrong S and r in Speedmaster and no serif anywhere. The step's edge is also soft, like in a redial.

Lug tops look off, could be due to perspective, but lug bottoms are certainly wrong.

You can try to claim a prototype, but that movement is more likely a recent put together, making it hard to make that claim.

Fost · Jul 5, 2015

I am sorry again but this is not a DON bezel (110% sure) and the dial is really strange ... All the Alert are in red for me but i could be wrong.
My experience is that when too Many things are strange ... It is generaly a bas conslusion. The 69 are very Well described everywhere espeicially in MWO and other place, so i think if a service dial like this one was produced by Omega We should have heard about it sooner...

gemini4 · Jul 5, 2015

Thanks to all for your comments regarding this purchase. As an experienced Speedie owner, my early warning radar would normally be activated over the appearance incorrect parts. A newer bezel, a service or incorrect dial, incorrect movement number all would point to a watch that has been assembled or been a victim of Omega service.

I'm hoping ($20 worth) that this is not the case regarding this 145.022-69.

The dial and bezel appear to be of inferior workmanship. They do not match the exact characteristics of what we are used to seeing. Certain movement parts and the numbering system are also questionable.

Perhaps these facts point to a former owner who went to a great deal of trouble to create a very personal 145.022-69 complete with his own dial and bezel. I'm hoping it points to a prototype watch.

I will post better pics upon receipt later in the week.

Thanks!

STANDY · Jul 5, 2015

alam
I suspect the train has left the station for your advice..☕

Classic, post of the day...

gemini4 · Jul 5, 2015

One more comment regarding this 861 movement.

It has been previously noted that the lozenge adjustment index is the type found on earlier 321 movements. Of further interest is what appears to be the lack of a screw anchor hole under this index. This is screw anchor hole is normally found in all 861 movements (using MWO as a reference) and should (if it is actually there) be visible under the sides of the 321 index. Opinions?

Also of note, it appears that there are no service markings in either the inside caseback or the underside of the anti magnetic cap.

Archer · Jul 5, 2015

This is a very odd watch. The balance cock is all wrong for an 861. Not only is the eccentric screw missing, and the regulating pointer is not hollow for that screw, but the stud carrier appears to be the wrong colour. If you look at the balance spring coming out of regulating pins, it makes a very odd nearly 90 degree turn, like someone tried to fit the wrong balance to the watch. Edited to add this photo - this is not what the spring should look like.

Okay it might just be the angle of the photo making the dog leg look very extreme....would need to see another photo to be sure...

The colour of the balance wheel is also wrong. I'll be surprised if this runs well, if it runs at all.

The bezel insert looks like it has been removed, and really doesn't fit the bezel well - might have been machined down to fit, and done very unevenly. Even the crystal looks off to me - like it is a much higher dome that a proper Speedmaster crystal.

As far as the lack of watchmaker service marks inside, well if I was involved with this watch, I certainly would not want it traced back to me, so maybe not too surprising there are no marks.

I know you want to believe this is something special, but I think if you take the emotion out of this, it's just some put together watch mate...and a very bad one at that...

Cheers, Al

TNTwatch · Jul 5, 2015

Gemini4
One more comment regarding this 861 movement.

It has been previously noted that the lozenge adjustment index is the type found on earlier 321 movements. Of further interest is what appears to be the lack of a screw anchor hole under this index. This is screw anchor hole is normally found in all 861 movements (using MWO as a reference) and should (if it is actually there) be visible under the sides of the 321 index. Opinions?

Also of note, it appears that there are no service markings in either the inside caseback or the underside of the anti magnetic cap.

Have you heard of Lemania? Or Tissot, since the serial number looks like a Tissot one?

faid2black · Jul 5, 2015

Yeah, starting with the clearly fake bezel, i wouldn't trust a single thing about that watch. Hope the seller accepts your return without hassle. Good luck!

gemini4 · Jul 5, 2015

Getting more "NO"s than a Greek Referemdum.

I'm hearing what everyone is saying but what about the dial? You think this is homemade?