Forums Latest Members
  1. qazwsx1 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    697
    Likes
    2,810
    I just want to share my omega model 2652, 14k, cal.354 with serial no. 1,476,xxx.

    In my opinion the case look quite good. The dial is authentic. The hand and crown are correct. Also, caseback and medallion look OK too.

    May it be one of the lastest version of this 2652 model (2652-15sc)? or someone change dial from 2782 then insert to this 2652 ref.? What’s your opinion?

    I want to share and ask this forum in 5 questions.
    1. The “OMEGA” word on dial of 2562 can be in both "nonapplied" or 'applied' (like my watch). (I think YES)
    2. The font of the dial is a little bit different between model 2652 and 2782. (I think YES)
    3. The caseback of 2652 and 2782 model cannot interchange because of different in mechanism to insert. (I think YES)
    4. The most important question. Is the dial of 2782 can be use in 2652 model? (I am not sure because some experts say yes and someone say no. However, one of my friend told me that he cannot do because of the difference in size of the dial. The 2652 is larger (29.5 mm in 2652 vs 27.4 mm in 2782)

    The diameter of dial in 2652 is 29.80 mm in comment from cristos71 in this link. (my friend measure 29.5 mm)
    https://omegaforums.net/threads/dial-dimensions-constellation-2648-and-2652.54682/

    5. Is the serial 1,476,xxx too late for 2652?

    What’s your opinion? Thanks.
    (So sorry for lots of pictures and my weak in English)
    1.jpg 2.jpg 3.jpg 4.jpg 5.jpg 6.jpg 7.jpg 8.jpg 9.jpg 10.jpg 11.jpg
     
  2. qazwsx1 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    697
    Likes
    2,810
    I found another watch in 14k, 2652-17sc, cal 354, serial no.1,491,xxx.
    1.jpg 2.jpg 3.jpg 4.jpg
     
  3. qazwsx1 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    697
    Likes
    2,810
  4. Peemacgee Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungers Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    5,125
    Likes
    7,824
    I will declare an interest in that I had a conversation with @qazwsx1 about this watch.
    I thought that a 2652 should have a printed Omega and crossed Ts - but the OP presented the examples he’s shown here as evidence that there are other 2652s like his.
    I also found 2782s with earlier serials with crossed T and printed logo dials.

    are these late 2652s some kind of transitional/ crossover hybrid?

    I’ll tag @cristos71 and @gatorcpa as a starter but any other gurus on early Connies please feel free to chime in.
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  5. qazwsx1 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    697
    Likes
    2,810
    I really appreciate your help and your support.
     
  6. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    One of my favorite watches, here is one of mine
    cal 505.jpg
    orisg.jpg
     
    iamvr, Retsamaes, sonicosa and 4 others like this.
  7. qazwsx1 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    697
    Likes
    2,810
  8. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    2652
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  9. qazwsx1 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    697
    Likes
    2,810
    How about serial no. and batch like 2652- .. ?
     
  10. cristos71 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    7,133
    Likes
    32,879
    I'm like you, with a 2652 I'd normally expect to see crossed 't's and a printed 'Omega'. I believe the change over to applied 'Omega' came around serial numbers 13.9 million and up.

    The majority of 2652's that I've seen have been in this earlier serial range and I've had no reason to investigate further but as you say the evidence presented here by these very late 2652-xx speak for themselves.

    Regarding the dial diameters AFAIK the dials are the same size, with only the 2648 having a greater diameter.

    Maybe @hoipolloi can shed some light?
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  11. cristos71 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    7,133
    Likes
    32,879
    Non-screw back, it must be a different ref
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  12. MSNWatch Vintage Omega Aficionado Staff Member Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    6,528
    Likes
    10,778
    My knee jerk response was to say the 2652s need to have a printed ‘omega’ but thinking about it a bit more exceptions exist for both references that is to say applied can be seen in 2652s and printed for 2782s.
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  13. Caliber561 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    1,473
    Likes
    2,511
    I'm not entirely convinced the dial in the OP's watch is authentic. The white of the dial is incredibly stark, and there is no division between the center dial and the outer dial like on virtually all of these early Constellation dials, pie-pan or dome. Also, the "CERTIFIED" text has too much spacing between the crosshair and its "c."
     
    qazwsx1 and OMEGuy like this.
  14. OMEGuy Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
  15. OMEGuy Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
    +1 :thumbsup:

    What I noticed when first looking at the pictures, was also that the print looks too glossy and raised, while not quite sharp.

    [​IMG]

    BTW: Where is the "SWISS MADE" in this picture? Photoshopped away? ::confused2::
     
    Edited Apr 2, 2020
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  16. OMEGuy Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
    Probably not.

    Are you playing games? I mean, just a couple of days ago you came here with an unconventional dial question.
     
    Edited Apr 2, 2020
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  17. Peemacgee Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungers Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    5,125
    Likes
    7,824
    to be fair to the OP, I suggested he opened this watch up to the forum for discussion when he asked my opinion on it - and I said that it would likely be subject to debate.
    (about an applied Omega on a 2652)

    FWIW, I don’t think it’s a redial - and if it is it’s a truly phenomenal job.
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  18. OMEGuy Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
    I'm not here to argue whether it's a redial or not. I have my opinion on that. But where is the "SWISS MADE" in the OP's pic I copied to my post?
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  19. Caliber561 Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    1,473
    Likes
    2,511
    It's visible in the first photo. I suspect the rehaut is blocking it in the other shots.
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.
  20. OMEGuy Apr 2, 2020

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
    I suspect that's not possible.
     
    qazwsx1 likes this.