Hi All,
It's been ages since I've had a good look around the forum so please excuse me if this has indeed been covered before...

Now with full access to the Omega Extranet I can finally settle an old argument. For years, examples of ‘upside down’ or reversed Ploprof’s have been around. The general consensus had been that they were modified to be that way or even worse, a Watchmaker put them back together after service incorrectly....which is hard to fathom because the date disc is different between the crown at 9 and crown at 3 versions.

So with that in mind, YES, I can confirm that both versions were manufactured by Omega. There is even a way to tell the configuration of the watch when it left the factory.

In the first photo you’ll see what is considered the correct orientation, crown at 9, or left. Note the Omega engraving inside the case back, it is triangle shaped and is the right way up.

Now look at the second photo, you’ll see the triangle is also the right way up but the case is reversed, or in the crown at 3 position.

So the triangle always orients the case....original crown at 3 position watches and those that have been converted later on will now be relatively easy to confirm.

 

I've seen the issue of the caseback text covered before and I'd like to ask - I have no dog in this fight, so to say - if you are certain that this upside-down engraving is an intentional design choice by Omega and not just a quirk of production? And if it really is so (a separate, intentional variation), why doesn't it have an unique reference number? As you say, the date disc would have to be different between the two variations, so in order to find the correct part you'd assume that Omega made a distinction between the two cases.

Or do you have some sort of confirmation from Omega themselves that this is the way to distinguish between the two, identically named references?

 

This is information directly from the Omega Extranet, their in-house computer reference system, I have an Omega authorised workshop....

'The Ploprof with case ref. 166.0077 exists in 2 versions. One with crown at 3 o’clock and one with crown at 9 o’clock.
The engraving in the caseback is the only reference point to tell which version you should have. The triangular OMEGA engraving is always facing up.'

 

Good to see that confirmed from Omega, I'm intending to buy a Ploprof at some point in the near future and had been wondering that very point about the cases.
I picked up a nice Ploprof dial as a spare last year so i have a start

 

Interesting. I assume both the case and caseback have the same part number ( meaning for both variants) right? So the difference would be the thread configuration on the case? caseback? In order to achieve the desired position of the triangle?

 

Well, actually, there is no caseback. It's just a stainless steel brick with a hole in the front.

 

agh! now makes sense! thx!

 

Will both cases fit each configuration....

 

Both cases fit each configuration. It's only the stamp inside that case that is different. You just need a regular datedisc for cal 1002 to set it to righthand crown.

 

I didn't mention that these where regular in both ways…just wanted to clear that the case is 1:1 the same only the stamp is upside down.

 

Well if there are two date wheels. What else would the different date wheel fit besides a upside down polprof

 

One datewheel is for the leftsided crown because you need to turn the dial 180° and then the regular datewheel would not be exactly in the window. The other ones are just the regular ones for all cal. 1000 watches with rightsided crowns.

 

i still don't believe it cuz one can't operate the bezel (one handed) with the upside down config

 

So is the date wheel that is needed for the reverse to normal only suitable for a reverse polprof ?

 

One of these, seen in l/h and r/h configuration.

 

Yes

 

As well as the silver date disc, there is also a yellow date disc listed with the stem at 9 for the 1000 series movements so maybe there are other watches with it

 

http://www.ploprof.com/PloProf.html

seems to me the "inverse/reverse" proplof is a myth, a result of servicing by someone who cant obtain the correct date disc for the 1660077