Hi I would like to seek the collective's view on whether it is a good purchase or not. Lets get a couple of important questions out the way: 1) Is this your 'uncle's' watch/are you a car boot sale chancer? No I have been offered it by a dealer at what seems like a reasonable price and am looking for opinions. 2) What does your research tell you? It tells me it is a 14.38m serial ~1955/6 movement Omega 266 movement manual wind watch hallmarked for Birmingham 1956-57, in a UK made Dennison case. The lume (presumably radium) in the hands and dial is flaking and a speck can be seen loose on the dial a little which makes me think the dial could be unrestored/original but I have a very minor doubt about where the crosshairs hit the 6 marker as it doesn't look like a bang on match under a loupe but looks fine with the naked eye. I have fuzzed the case and movement serials by the way, they are intact 3) So why are you bothering us? Because I am hoping someone can help me decide if it is straight and original or in fact a repaint/redial and therefore not worth buying. At present, I will probably buy it as it is running great but would like affirmation or otherwise. All input welcome 4) Yes Yes but why is there no picture of a Speedmaster in this thread? Hopefully Mad Dog will be along soon. Anyhoo anyone care to share an opinion?
And there was me thinking I had covered the questions but Okayyy. Assuming the dial is original, it is very clean, I like the crosshairs look and this is a very tidy dress watch for a 50 year old. The movement is running well, amplitude is around 290deg with roughly +3s per day dial up, a little beat error though. Some have an issue with Swiss watches cased up locally but being as I am from Birmingham where this case was made, that is less of an issue for me, Dennison did make some great quality examples for both Omega and Rolex. Why do any of us like older watches?
To me, the dial is genuine and in fair condition. Everything seems OK. There seems to be a lume dot that is no longer at its place and went in the middle of the dial. Could be put back to its original place (at 8 I guess) or redone if necessary. But you may want to be sure it is not a spot on the dial - it would look far less attractive. One of the screws holding the movement in the case may be not screwed tigh enough - or may be too big - but if it is actually true, that is not a big deal.
The lume spot is loose so yes I guess maybe it could be stuck back, there are no other major marks or spots on the dial but a slight variance in colour which is more visible in pictures, not really in real life. Thank you for your constructive input, I too think it original but I value the learned opinions of others. I am also happy to hear if anyone else thinks it is not original, or if they wish to reinforce that it is.
I'm concerned about font thickness and discrepancies in the crosshair thickness, axis to 6 compared to axis to 9. As you mentioned, a slight alignment issue. Up close and personal is much better than photo's but my gut reaction was redial. I'm also personally affronted by the Uncle comments!
As far as I can tell, the dial is original. The crossing lines are sharp and as they should be. The "swiss made" has the correct font and is correctly placed, etc. And this kind of dial is correct for the period and has been used on Dennison cased Omega. The dial may have been gently cleaned at some point - the Omega script seems a little yellowish on its borders. But could be the pic and it would still be a nice dial. I could always be wrong though!
An original dial to compare. Here is my 18K Dennison case 283 - a very rare reference. The crosshair on the OP's watch are a bit thicker as Uncle Buck noticed. But I think they are still good: they touch the markers as they should and are slightly thinner than they are.
I looked mainly at the first shot, it definitely looks better on the second. Padders, take your loupe and follow the crosshairs and study the fonts for inconsistent thickness. Nothing like hands-on at 20X ! Francois's last post emphasizes the thickness concerns I have. Both fine looking watches!
That is one beautiful watch Francois and studying it has reassured me rather as the interface at the crosshairs and chapter markings is rather similar to the one I am looking at. I will take another good look with the loupe Buck but the lines look consistent thickness so far. It is a tricky one this one. If it has had work, it was very subtle, that's for sure!
Uncle Buck is right! We could discuss this dial all the day long, but a carreful examination in person with a loupe would quickly give us a definite answer! So I would say, according to what I see on the pics, the dial looks original even if the crosshairs are sometimes thinner.
By the way, here is a very interesting paper about Dennison cased Omega. Nice pictures and the best analysis I have read on this topic. http://download1084.mediafire.com/c9cctwrk3usg/sm0adrdqjswgdp1/Dennison Essay March 2015.pdf
I had seen that before but on looking again it did give me useful further into so thanks. It sounds like this one, a 13322 model is pretty run of the mill, but the condition seems pretty good and it seems pretty reasonably priced too for a solid gold Omega. I will buy it I think.