Plexiglass Replacement on Vintage Seamasters / Constellation Cases

Posts
3,193
Likes
6,244
Hi. Does the replacement procedure of the plexiglass on Omega Seamasters and Constellations (lets say case numbers 168.023 and 168.010, for example) similar to the procedure on the Omega Speedmasters 861 / 1861 / etc with plexiglass (edited: removal of movement, old plexiglass is pushed out with a press from the inside of the case, new one is set in place from the outside with a press)? Does the bezel needs to be removed?

I asked as have seen some plexiglass on older watches (like the Tudor Date Day, for example) which just sit on top of the case and is hold in place by the bezel (so installed and removed from the top) while on others are like stated above
Edited:
 
Posts
2,218
Likes
4,942
I would advise against learning watchmaking on a delicate and expensive case like the references you've given. It's too easy to damage the case pressing in a new crystal if you are not used to doing it, especially as you may have gold cases (you didn't specify). Most crystals with a tension ring retaining system are fitted in the same way but, re-read what you've written as you've made an error in your explanation.

Best bet is to find a watchmaker you can trust and use her/him. You will need someone for servicing anyway. If you damage a case of a $1500 watch, it will hurt a lot.

Cheers, Chris
 
Posts
3,193
Likes
6,244
I would advise against learning watchmaking on a delicate and expensive case like the references you've given. It's too easy to damage the case pressing in a new crystal if you are not used to doing it, especially as you may have gold cases (you didn't specify). Most crystals with a tension ring retaining system are fitted in the same way but, re-read what you've written as you've made an error in your explanation.

Best bet is to find a watchmaker you can trust and use her/him. You will need someone for servicing anyway. If you damage a case of a $1500 watch, it will hurt a lot.

Cheers, Chris

Thanks for comments; wording above corrected :thumbsup: