[PICTURE UPDATE] 2998-1 with an A2 Dial (Wide O / Low Omega)???

about3blank · Dec 15, 2018

Pictures pending.

MWO says 2998-1 only had A3 (Wide O / High Omega) and A4 (Round O / Low Omega), with A2 reserved for 2915-3.

Don't know yet, but let's say it's a 2998-1 serial.

How concerned (or excited?) would you be?

Is this something that comes up ocassionally but not captured in MWO? Or does something about the 2915-2998 transition make it so "No A2s on 2998s" is a hard and fast rule?

Or, on the flipside does the presence of the 2915 dial make it even more awesome to you?

(2915-3 and 2998-1 serials seem far apart, so if it's a 2915-3 serial with movement holder holes, then we may be talking about just a swapped caseback on a 2915-3...)

Thanks in advance for the input! Cheers OF

gemini4 · Dec 15, 2018

Pictures pending.
Opinion pending.

about3blank · Dec 15, 2018

gemini4
Pictures pending.
Opinion pending.

Fair enough! 😁 Seller has a dibs'd-buyer that is contemplating it over the weekend, said he'd send over a package of pics incl. movement, Geiger/UV etc. once the first buyer is out. Here are a couple that I have on hand, but higher res pics definitely needed

(there's that sizable dent between 1 and 2 o'clock also, but worried about correctness first -- mark almost makes me more comfortable it's not an oven-baked, lollipop 100k "beauty")

gemini4 · Dec 15, 2018

So, a 2998-1 with a 2915-3 dial, and hour hand. I believe these have been seen before.
But the bezel is incorrect, should be a base 1000.
End link looks very loose. What are the specifics of the bracelet and end links and crown? Are pushers replacements?
Lume is very bright and uniform? Perhaps too nice as dial has some damage ?
Certainly would expect a major cpm count.

about3blank · Dec 15, 2018

gemini4
So, a 2998-1 with a 2915-3 dial, and hour hand. I believe these have been seen before.
But the bezel is incorrect, should be a base 1000.
End link looks very loose. What are the specifics of the bracelet and end links and crown? Are pushers replacements?
Lume is very bright and uniform? Perhaps too nice as dial has some damage ?
Certainly would expect a major cpm count.

Thanks a lot!

Yeah, seller was upfront about the Base 1000, which was obvious enough at first glance. Price reflects it. The current bezel's greenish fade has some attraction though, I don't mind.

When you say "I believe these have been seen before" do you mean as original/correct, or as a batch of prepped frankens?

Sounds like the former, but just making sure as this pretty much exactly the crux of my question. I've been OF and Google image searching like mad past few days but not seeing it. I've searched through threads here too but haven't come upon anything discussing that specific issue. Thanks again!

(As an aside, it's why I almost never post -- my questions are always already answered somewhere, and I don't have enough expertise to be spoutin' knowledge bombs everywhere either. Took me 3+ years to even make an account)

I've got a due diligence checklist ready for if/when the pics come in, and you've hit a lot of my worries:

- UV/Geiger check top of the list as the radium is a "tritium" yellow, but those look like filtered pictures too. That one non-filtered pic looks better, but def needs a check still. Seller explicitly said it's radium that he's checked with a Geiger though... 😕

- Pushers look too big for sure

- Haven't seen the logo side of the crown yet. Teeth look like 32?

- Didn't notice that the endlinks look loose, but you're totally right! Either way, checking for the font on the 6 is key after that endlink authentication thread from September https://omegaforums.net/threads/endlink-authentication-numbers-6-506-and-516.81724/

- Is that a longer 2915 hour hand? I had looked at it and thought it the standard 2998 length but of course I'm just eyeballing the few pictures I have, and my intuition looking at early 60s Speedies is nowhere near where it is for twisted lug premoons, so I defer to y'all (and to the calpers later)

Story is supposedly seller got it from another friend whom he's been trying to convince to sell since the early 2000s and he finally got him to bite. So, if true, replacement parts should only be from Omega...

Thanks again @gemini4 and whomever else has some good info they'd like to share! Your expertise is appreciated by those of us less knowledgeable (and hence more fearful! 😲)

gemini4 · Dec 15, 2018

I believe I missed a important point.
It is the A3s Dial that are seen on both the 2915-3 and 2998-1.
It appears, so hard to be sure, that your dial is an A2 which is not normally seen on a 2998-1, only the 3 2915s.
Being that the A2 Dial is so valuable to a 2915-1 or 2915-2 project, I doubt if it was installed on a 2998-1 recently.

chronoboy64 · Dec 15, 2018

the "dent" between 1 and 2 looks like a real hole for me speared from inside to outside. Very strange.
Are you sure you want such a watch ?

td69 · Dec 15, 2018

about3blank
When you say "I believe these have been seen before" do you mean as original/correct, or as a batch of prepped frankens?

I believe it meant there are a number of 2998-1s that are seen with the 2915-3 long hour hand. IMHO, this is gradually becoming more acceptable. However to my eyes this seems to be a regular 2998 hour hand. See the attached photo of the 2915-3 hour hand. The square-end of the lume area on the 2915-3 hand is sitting closer to the center than the corner edge of the hand.

about3blank
Pushers look too big for sure

To my eyes, they look fine and could possibly be original due to a relatively shorter stem than the replacement ones.

chronoboy64
the "dent" between 1 and 2 looks like a real hole for me speared from inside to outside. Very strange.
Are you sure you want such a watch ?

+1 to this. That's what worries me most. I believe it is the spot under which the dial legs are located. Same but to lesser degree can be seen at between 8 and 9. It could be that the dial legs have had some work on or they were damages from compression or the like.

All comes down to the price I believe. This is a really rare watch with certain charms. Whether to go on and acquire it, you need to weight in on more than a few factors here. Good luck.

about3blank · Dec 15, 2018

chronoboy64
the "dent" between 1 and 2 looks like a real hole for me speared from inside to outside. Very strange.
Are you sure you want such a watch ?

Thanks! I had brought up the exact same point with the seller and he insists it is not a "hole" but a dent. I told him a hole would be a dealbreaker, and need the better pics to evaluate that too (will upload when/if received).

Seller thinks caused by a previous watchmaker who dropped a dial onto a dial foot? Or something. Needs further examination for sure

about3blank · Dec 15, 2018

gemini4
I believe I missed a important point.
It is the A3s Dial that are seen on both the 2915-3 and 2998-1.
It appears, so hard to be sure, that your dial is an A2 which is not normally seen on a 2998-1, only the 3 2915s.
Being that the A2 Dial is so valuable to a 2915-1 or 2915-2 project, I doubt if it was installed on a 2998-1 recently.

Thanks! This is exactly the mystery! It is definitely an A2 and not an A3 to my eye. A3s have an Omega much closer to the logo I think?

about3blank · Dec 15, 2018

td69
I believe it meant there are a number of 2998-1s that are seen with the 2915-3 long hour hand. IMHO, this is gradually becoming more acceptable. However to my eyes this seems to be a regular 2998 hour hand. See the attached photo of the 2915-3 hour hand. The square-end of the lume area on the 2915-3 hand is sitting closer to the center than the corner edge of the hand.

To my eyes, they look fine and could possibly be original due to a relatively shorter stem than the replacement ones.

+1 to this. That's what worries me most. I believe it is the spot under which the dial legs are located. Same but to lesser degree can be seen at between 8 and 9. It could be that the dial legs have had some work on or they were damages from compression or the like.

All comes down to the price I believe. This is a really rare watch with certain charms. Whether to go on and acquire it, you need to weight in on more than a few factors here. Good luck.

Thanks! Yeah, had thought from length these were regular 2998, but had not known of the fact about the square end! Super helpful

Did not know about the pusher stem also, was just judging based on my 105.012 pushers seeming to stick out past the crown less, but that is helpful

Yeah, that's the issue -- it really is a rare watch that, despite the potential flaws (whcih certainky warrant further investigation), is really charming, at least to me.

The alternative is a really correct, honest, textbook, nerd-owned mid-2998 but without the charm and rarity of this one

The pull of that wide, oval O is strong (if correct)...

toddle321 · Dec 15, 2018

The mark at 1:30 is likely from a foot being resoldered. I believe this to be the case because I had a dial foot resoldered, and exactly the same thing happened In the same spot on my 321 Dial. It of course devalues the dial

STANDY · Dec 15, 2018

about3blank
Thanks! I had brought up the exact same point with the seller and he insists it is not a "hole" but a dent. I told him a hole would be a dealbreaker, and need the better pics to evaluate that too (will upload when/if received).

Seller thinks caused by a previous watchmaker who dropped a dial onto a dial foot? Or something. Needs further examination for sure

Is that a dent from the other dial foot also in pic at the 41 minute marker

about3blank · Dec 15, 2018

toddle321
The mark at 1:30 is likely from a foot being resoldered. I believe this to be the case because I had a dial foot resoldered, and exactly the same thing happened In the same spot on my 321 Dial. It of course devalues the dial

Interesting! Makes sense. I had a LeCoultre E335 with @photo500 with a missing foot last year and he pretty much said the same thing -- that attempted repairs would mar the dial front

One other thing that hasn't been mentioned is the minor chrono creep...

STANDY · Dec 15, 2018

about3blank
One other thing that hasn't been mentioned is the minor chrono creep...

Small in comparison to dial issues 😉

Len · Dec 16, 2018

about3blank
Pictures pending.

MWO says 2998-1 only had A3 (Wide O / High Omega) and A4 (Round O / Low Omega), with A2 reserved for 2915-3.

Don't know yet, but let's say it's a 2998-1 serial.

How concerned (or excited?) would you be?

Is this something that comes up ocassionally but not captured in MWO? Or does something about the 2915-2998 transition make it so "No A2s on 2998s" is a hard and fast rule?

Or, on the flipside does the presence of the 2915 dial make it even more awesome to you?

(2915-3 and 2998-1 serials seem far apart, so if it's a 2915-3 serial with movement holder holes, then we may be talking about just a swapped caseback on a 2915-3...)

Thanks in advance for the input! Cheers OF

I have seen sn17301140 showing a flat O and high SwissMade and sn17301305 showing normal O low SwissMade, so transition from oval O to round O likely near these serial numbers

about3blank · Dec 16, 2018

Len
I have seen sn17301140 showing a flat O and high SwissMade and sn17301305 showing normal O low SwissMade, so transition from oval O to round O likely near these serial numbers

Thanks! The issue is that per MWO, the combination of Oval O + Low OMEGA (not Swiss Made), only happened in the 2915-3 (A2 Dial)

Oval O + High OMEGA (A3 Dial) and Round O + Low OMEGA (A4 Dial) are the only combos listed for the 2998-1

As you said, normally you'd think that would be fine as they made the transition from Oval O to Round O around that time. So maybe it's just a minor bit of serial number overlap.

The complication is that MWO also puts the 2915-3 serials (ending ~16.6mm) a good chunk apart from the 2998-1 serials (starting ~17.3mm). So it seemingly makes a dial seen "only" in 2915-3s less likely to be correct in a 2998-1.

THAT is what I've been trying to get confirmation on by starting this thread, dial dent issues aside (hence the title and the beginning question):

Are A2s (Oval O + Low OMEGA) really only seen on 2915-3s, or have correct 2998-1s been observed with A2s as well, despite the MWO listing?

Is the gap in serial numbers between 2915-3 and 2998-1 really that wide (not seen in other sub-references) and why? Does that imply less potential crossover of components?

I have far less experience in the early 60s Speedies, so would be super grateful if any of the forum experts who have handled a few examples of these and have studied them deeply would know.

That question in isolation doesn't really need further pitcures to be evaluated, I think?

Thanks in advance

mac_omega · Dec 16, 2018

about3blank
Thanks! The issue is that per MWO, the combination of Oval O + Low OMEGA (not Swiss Made), only happened in the 2915-3 (A2 Dial)

Oval O + High OMEGA (A3 Dial) and Round O + Low OMEGA (A4 Dial) are the only combos listed for the 2998-1

As you said, normally you'd think that would be fine as they made the transition from Oval O to Round O around that time. So maybe it's just a minor bit of serial number overlap.

The complication is that MWO also puts the 2915-3 serials (ending ~16.6mm) a good chunk apart from the 2998-1 serials (starting ~17.3mm). So it seemingly makes a dial seen "only" in 2915-3s less likely to be correct in a 2998-1.

THAT is what I've been trying to get confirmation on by starting this thread, dial dent issues aside (hence the title and the beginning question):

Are A2s (Oval O + Low OMEGA) really only seen on 2915-3s, or have correct 2998-1s been observed with A2s as well, despite the MWO listing?

Is the gap in serial numbers between 2915-3 and 2998-1 really that wide (not seen in other sub-references) and why? Does that imply less potential crossover of components?

I have far less experience in the early 60s Speedies, so would be super grateful if any of the forum experts who have handled a few examples of these and have studied them deeply would know.

That question in isolation doesn't really need further pitcures to be evaluated, I think?

Thanks in advance

Mine has a serial 17.3xxxxx and has a dial oval O low Omega - hope this helps (original warranty paper came with the watch)

about3blank · Dec 16, 2018

mac_omega
Mine has a serial 17.3xxxxx and has a dial oval O low Omega - hope this helps (original warranty paper came with the watch)

Super helpful! Thanks!!

about3blank · Dec 17, 2018

PICTURE UPDATE:

Dibs'd buyer backed out. First batch of pictures is in. No movement holder holes and 16m serial, so NOT a 2915-3 sadly (would've made it an insta-buy 😎)

Planning to ask for a second batch (endlinks, UV, Geiger), any input for additional diligence requests or pictures is more than welcome.

In the meantime, I'm sadly making the great guy with the straightforward mid-2998 wait... 🙁

(He knows the situation though and has the link to this page)

Thanks again OF!!