recently acquired 2531.80

Posts
336
Likes
164
There is in fact a lot of changes between 1993 and 2006 馃槈 Despite the facts the watches looks the same at first sight. The 1994 exemple I posted has a 60 clicks bezel, no logo helium valve and a different typo than yours 2 years later in 1996 (120 clicks, typo, logo). 1996 last year with tritium also.

Interesting, I thought the one I bought in 96 was the original... I didn't realise they upped the model before GoldenEye and it existed as a different model. What typo is different?
 
Posts
188
Likes
266
The most obvious is the shape of the 3 in the 300. Look closely. OP's watch or mine have some asymmetric 3. The one from 2006 has a symmetric 3.

Asymmetric 3 disappear end of 1995 (strangely comes back in some watches in early 00's). Of course there is no straight line at midnight 12/31/1995 馃槈 One can have papers with a 1996 date with "1995" specs. Specially at the beginning of the year. Gap between production and sell.

Screen accurate "Tomorrow Never Dies" is 2531 normal 3, logo, Tritium for exemple.
A screen accurate 1995 Golden Eye like mine is 2541 asymmetric 3, logo, Tritium. And so on.

 
Posts
336
Likes
164
The most obvious is the shape of the 3 in the 300. Look closely. OP's watch or mine have some asymmetric 3. The one from 2006 has a symmetric 3.

Asymmetric 3 disappear end of 1995 (strangely comes back in some watches in early 00's). Of course there is no straight line at midnight 12/31/1995 馃槈 One can have papers with a 1996 date with "1995" specs. Specially at the beginning of the year. Gap between production and sell.

Screen accurate "Tomorrow Never Dies" is 2531 normal 3, logo, Tritium for exemple.
A screen accurate 1995 Golden Eye like mine is 2541 asymmetric 3, logo, Tritium. And so on.


I'll have to check mine tomorrow, and have a look. Curious now. My lume has long gone. My late father's, which I assumed was the same has a fair bit of lume left and his was maybe only a year or so newer, maybe 2, so will check that as well.
Thanks for the info. I assumed all through Brosnan they were the same, apart from the switch from quartz after the first one, obvs.
 
Posts
336
Likes
164
I'll have to check mine tomorrow, and have a look. Curious now. My lume has long gone. My late father's, which I assumed was the same has a fair bit of lume left and his was maybe only a year or so newer, maybe 2, so will check that as well.
Thanks for the info. I assumed all through Brosnan they were the same, apart from the switch from quartz after the first one, obvs.
Found this shot from a while back, I'm trying to remember, as unfortunately he's no longer with us, but I'd guess maybe up to 2 years difference between them and after what you've just told me, his lasting lume, (watch on the right) makes a whole lot more sense now. I'll check out in person at some point. And I always thought they were the same 1990s 300.......
 
Posts
188
Likes
266
Yours is a atypical 1996 "Tomorrow". Normal 3, tritium.

On the right a "World is not Enought". Normal 3, super luminova. Luminova lume will not fade over time vs tritium. 1998 is a coherent date for that watch, yes.

That's why lume is the best way to check new SL parts on old SMP.
 
Posts
336
Likes
164
Yours is a atypical 1996 "Tomorrow". Normal 3, tritium.

On the right a "World is not Enought". Normal 3, super luminova. Luminova lume will not fade over time vs tritium. 1998 is a coherent date for that watch, yes.

That's why lume is the best way to check new SL parts on old SMP.

Thanks for the info, Applied markers would have been a more obvious tell, they look so similar. I never even noticed until your threads. Just assumed there was lume on that one because it was newer than mine. Almost 30 years of them, but I think after 18 years of daily PO 42mm, they don't get a look in so much because the mid sizes are not as legible as they once were, to me anyway! But after all these years those quartz have been excellent watches. Just wish it was the larger size.
 
Posts
15
Likes
49
I just looked up the serial, 60505788 which would put it as a 1999. That doesn't make sense considering the tritium lume. The bezel is 60 clicks with a small amount of play. Is it possible this is a franken watch? I don't have the tools, or the confidence, to open the case back to check on the movement.
Edited:
 
Posts
10,305
Likes
16,126
60.5m is later than I would expect for the tritium cutoff. The online serial lists are not reliable but I'd but that serial around 1997-98 so in this case not far off. Does your lume have any persistence? You may well have Superluminova that has photographed a bit beige.
 
Posts
15
Likes
49
no, no persistence. The 60 click bezel is what really has me concerned.
 
Posts
596
Likes
1,834
I have a 2298.80 with a 600xxxxx serial number that also appears to have tritium. Bezel is 120 clicks. Not sure if the serials are that reliable as to categorize a watch as a franken.



The seconds hand holds charge and it may as well be a replacement. The rest barely holds any.

 
Posts
336
Likes
164
I just looked up the serial, 60505788 which would put it as a 1999. That doesn't make sense considering the tritium lume. The bezel is 60 clicks with a small amount of play. Is it possible this is a franken watch? I don't have the tools, or the confidence, to open the case back to check on the movement.

Looks pretty sound, I'm guessing it's just dated wrong
 
Posts
188
Likes
266
I just looked up the serial, 60505788 which would put it as a 1999. That doesn't make sense considering the tritium lume. The bezel is 60 clicks with a small amount of play. Is it possible this is a franken watch? I don't have the tools, or the confidence, to open the case back to check on the movement.

Honestly on these watches the serial number doesn't mean much. You have no persistance at all so tritium, an old asymmetric 3. I was pretty sure on me last page. Your third photo shows greenish hands with black "moisture" on them.

To bad you don't have the papers. I've seen of lots of "real" franken from Omega in those early years. They took what comes around. 60 bezel clicks in a way prouves it's a old one.

So you can imagine a "fake" franken but also simply a late 1994 watches with mixed specs. Make it open if you want but I don't worry a lot, you will find the right mouvement. You can check exactly the power reserve if you want : 38 hours. Wear it an all 12 hours day and put it to rest. Note the hour it stops. A good tell.

The 2298 has the second hand replaced for a SL one. Happens a lot when the tritium becomes dust and goes every where in the watch. No choice. Like the hands of my oldie. Had to replace them.
 
Posts
188
Likes
266
Just for fun. Tooked me 5 minutes on C24 to find the same watch as yours with also a 60XXX numbers. So no worries.


And for fun : an obvious 1993 one with a number starting with 49 XXX. The watch would have been produce in 1986 according to some internet serial numbers tables. 7 years before the model was even released 馃榾 (the seller who knows is job marked it as a 1993 of course).
 
Posts
10,305
Likes
16,126
The auto 2531 was launched 1994 was it not? It was the quartz launched in 1993, the auto lagged a year.
 
Posts
210
Likes
132
hi all.

recently acquired this 2531.80 for $2k. serviced by a local watchmaker a few weeks ago. This is my first luxury watch. how did I do?

Very nice!
 
Posts
188
Likes
266
The auto 2531 was launched 1994 was it not? It was the quartz launched in 1993, the auto lagged a year.

Yes the quartz came first. Somewhere end 1993, 1994 for the mechanicals. Again there is no straight line. And in fact that watch was not really a hit before GoldenEye. There can be sometimes months between an obvious specs and the date one can find on papers.

But those watches doesn't have the same specs all the time.

For instance the first ones have a 1109 caliber instead of the 1120 :



In those years there is no strict rules. I've seen all. Just good tells to date and check coherence of a watch.

Add the fact that not everyone serviced them properly over the years. Even my Omega's AD, who serviced my 1994, wanted to put a logo helium valve. Thought it was a ""fake"" helium valve whitout the logo 馃榾 Having papers from october 1994, I explained my case and Omega puts me a proper NOS no logo valve.

Very rare is the mechanical one without the chronometer line of text on the dial. Still mechanical but not COSC.

After 2000, it's mostly impossible to date the watch without the papers. They are standardize.
 
Posts
10,305
Likes
16,126
My point was that the auto you show above while clearly early can鈥檛 be a 1993 watch. Must be 1994-5.
 
Posts
188
Likes
266
1994 possible yes but not 1995. Unless it's a delay production/sells, 1995 ones have logo valves.

A funny way to be sure of that is the actual movie Goldeneye. Shooting started in january 1995 and watches in the movie have logo valves.