hi again omega fans
i recently buy this connie cuz the rareness of the dial it has two number 3s
it has a number 3 where it should be a 9 but the tricky part is that this 3 doesnt match the 3 of the other side because the dial is bezel (pie pan Style) that number 3 on the 9 was ment to be there?
the movement is in great shape keeps time great is from around early 60s
would be glad to here some opinion of this connie
thxs again for your help and thxs for this forum is really helpfull

 

What a great idea! I'll take the 3 and 9 off a pair of Constellation dials and then two 3's on one and two 9's on the other, then list them as "RARE!" and hope somebody falls for it. Rare? Sorry, sounds like a snake oil salesman's claims. Stranger things have happened but I seriously doubt it's original.

 

the things that the numbers are no mirrors from each others
i have look it with the magnifiying glass a lot
the number 3 of the left side dont match the number 3 of the rigth side, why each number have been bezel for each side
the 3 of the rigth side for match the other side have to be inverted for a good match will look like an 8
i will try to take more pics so we can discuss this matter
btw . i respect your opinion ,but everithing else of this connie is a 100% original
i am trying to know more about of the dial hope that someone help me with this
thxs for your replay

 

check out another anomaly of the dial the number one (1) on the 12 is a little bit higher and larger compared to the number 2

 

We need to see the back of the dial. I'd bet the dial was dirty and missing parts. The markers were all removed so the dial could be cleaned, then glued back in place but the person fixing it didn't have a 9 or or made a mistake and installed a second 3.

 

hi thxs everybody for your reply
i pay a fair price for this watch (not Premium) like a normal constellation
my curiosity for a good explanation make me take up the watch apart as you can see on the pics
the number 3 and 9 are riveted not glued
did a jeweler dismantle the dial for a clean up ?
glad to hear your comments

 

in the pic you can see a white number 3 i make a mistake that is the number 9 position
sorry
thxs for looking and for all your reply

 

i doubt if the crown is correct or originala to the watch...

 

I would have said that this is a reason to doubt the originality, rather than back up the claim.

More likely the numbers were remounted on the dial and the number one was put on upside down (I dont know where the peg is on the number 1, but if its slightly off centre, that would lead to the number one being above the number 2)

 

so changing the 9 marker with a 3 marker is not impossible...
granting that it was a factory error, who would want an erroneous dial? 3 on the 9 marker is just plane stupidity on a watch and not rarity..

 

If 25% of the workforce must be engaged in quality control, you have got some seriously bad manufacturing processes.

Hope they've got that fixed.

 

So a badly put back together redial...

 

You don't think that when it was re-dialled that somebody just stuffed up?

 

I've had a few misprint dials in my years of dealing but never have I see numbers switched..

 

Might be, but it gave us the fantastic 500's and 700's cal......
On average: quality of the end-product is 1:1 correlated with the amount of control in the process, meaning, check - control - check - control, etcetera..... Still going on, now executed by machines that do not have luncheon-brakes

BTW: 'interesting' watch. 'Let's meet at 3 for drinks'

 

I remember seeing a Patek Phillippe (or was it a JLC? Something high-end...) watch where the "7" and "8" had been switzed from factory... Naturally, the manufacturer wanted it back to rectify the issue, and wouldn't hear of NOT swapping them back.

Highly doubt that this one is a manufacturer's error, especially due to the fault at 12.