Forums Latest Members
  1. Steve Jul 4, 2012

    Posts
    899
    Likes
    133
    As some of you may know i've been very interested in getting a 1967 Speedie. This is the latest one i've found.
    Be happy to know what you guys think of it ?. Thanks.


    $T2eC16FHJIIE9qTYI4s)BP7M5i6e9!~~60_3.jpg

    $T2eC16dHJGIE9nnWrc1rBP7M57tqGQ~~60_3.jpg

    $T2eC16ZHJHIE9nyseyoZBP7M5z7hFQ~~60_3.jpg

    $(KGrHqVHJFYE+,V3EsQvBP7M6CFq6Q~~60_3.jpg

    $T2eC16NHJHQE9nzE)jldBP7M6GS3Og~~60_3.jpg
     
  2. dsio Ash @ ΩF Staff Member Jul 4, 2012

    Posts
    26,946
    Likes
    32,634
    Hands have dropped their lume but its common, and not critical, can either leave it as is or some people like to get the lume restored with a material that looks like aged tritium (but doesn't glow). Dial looks cool, original 1039 bracelet is nice, even though I wouldn't trust it to not fall apart, case has had honest use and wear over the years but hasn't had the edges polished off or the shit beaten out of it, I'd go for it if it were reasonably priced. Its not a mint example but its a very wearable example that could have a little bit of minor cosmetic detail done in time to step it up even further.
     
  3. Dash1 Jul 4, 2012

    Posts
    1,824
    Likes
    3,501
    I'd agree with that - a nice honest example. Ideal to use out and about and could be improved over time if wanted. I'd add that the hour sub-dial hand is wrong but that's no problem, also I don't think that is a 1039 bracelet and it is incorrect for the period as are the end-pieces. The lume on the hour markers has possibly been cleaned back a little too much, removing the tritium (would need a high def picture to tell for sure) but it still looks good and the dial is original and in good condition. Hopefully all those little things are reflected in the price.
    Really nice to have the correct bezel with the '.' over the '90' as that's rare and pricey to replace. I assume the movements serial no. is 26...... which would be about right.
    I love it!
     
  4. MSNWatch Vintage Omega Aficionado Staff Member Jul 4, 2012

    Posts
    6,531
    Likes
    10,796
    Looks nice and I second the lume comment. Not that big a deal but reduces the value slightly.
    Bracelet isn't a 1039 or a stretch one - looks like an 1171 type variant so need to factor that in - value is on the head only.
     
  5. speedycosmograph Speedmasterus Pontificatus Jul 8, 2012

    Posts
    325
    Likes
    68
    The 67 cal 321 is the most common year for the 321 in my experience. You should have no trouble finding plenty to choose from. I see them like this one sell from 2500 to 3500. The bezel is one of its best features and tough to find so clean and correct. The dial has def. had the markers cleaned up, which is pretty common, but it's always a shame to lose that color. So much of that tritium got really dark, esp. if it got damp. If it's less than 2500, seems like safe buy to me.
     
  6. MSNWatch Vintage Omega Aficionado Staff Member Jul 8, 2012

    Posts
    6,531
    Likes
    10,796
    Nice to see you here. Hope you are enjoying your 2998! Feel free to open up discussions about the speedmaster in this forum.
     
  7. pmontoyap Jul 8, 2012

    Posts
    482
    Likes
    938
    The only definite plus on this one is the bezel, its a nice one thought BUT I think if you wait for one with tritium on the dial you will be a much happier camper. My 2 cents!
     
  8. speedycosmograph Speedmasterus Pontificatus Jul 8, 2012

    Posts
    325
    Likes
    68
    I'm going to try to behave myself and not get chastised by moderators, but it's not easy. I do agree that a dial with the orig. patina is much more attractive. Now I need to find an avatar photo.
     
  9. dsio Ash @ ΩF Staff Member Jul 8, 2012

    Posts
    26,946
    Likes
    32,634
    Unless you're selling discount Nikes out of China, we're unlikely to mind lol
     
  10. Steve Jul 9, 2012

    Posts
    899
    Likes
    133
    Thanks again for all your advice. The watch was $3800 (reserve not met).. So i'll keep looking !.