I’ve been searching for an attractive 30t2 for a while and came upon this understated piece. It has an attractive honeycomb dial with rose gold dauphine hands and applied furniture. Crown appears correct. However I’m concerned that the minute indices don’t appear to properly line up with some of the hour markers esp at 2 and 7 o’clock. The intervals between the minute indices seem to be even and consistent. Magnified inspection under a loupe did not show signs of previous alterations. I recall seeing similar issues occasionally on other honeycomb dials but never verified whether this is a normal finding on non-refinished original examples. Thoughts?

 

I have had the same thoughts as you when evaluating honeycomb dials. I think these dials are a challenge to print, and this example looks perfectly original to me.
Beautiful watch BTW.

 

Are you sure this is a ref. 2800? I think the seller might have given you wrong information:

https://www.omegawatches.com/de/watch-omega-other-omega-ck-2800



The dial looks pretty new and doesn't seem to fit in the case perfectly.

The second hand should be rose gold instead of black.

Do you have further pictures?

 

The second hand is rose gold... look again.

 

"Swiss Made' seems pretty far off center, and some of the minute marks look pretty crooked (but the latter could just be the photo). As stated above, dial looks like it does not fit properly fit (or is not properly secured.

 

Caseback and movement photo shows a cal 265 dating to 1950. My understanding is case ref 2800 uses cal 266. My case appears to be the 35mm ref 2800 with the proper caseback. My dial and movement apparently belong to a different case. Which case reference(s) should this dial/movement belong to? Does it belong in an oversized case or 33.5mm case like a 2495? Does cal 265 utilize different sized dials?

 

You stated above that the movement is a cal. 30T2. That's why I was asking:

The dial might have been designed for another reference. At least it doesn't fit properly and I haven't seen the case ref. / dial combination before.

 

Yes I was mistaken.

“The dial might have been designed for another reference. At least it doesn't fit properly and I haven't seen the case ref. / dial combination before.”

Trying to figure this one out.

 

Sorry, but I was trying not to say what I thought from the beginning, that this is most likely a franken watch.

I believe this dial was made for a Jumbo case, maybe 37 mm. But I can't tell the reference for sure.

Also, coming back to your initial question, I'm not sure that the dial wasn't redone, would rather think it was...

 

The 30mm movements in all their various iterations were used in many, many different cases, each case having a specific dial size to fit the opening aperture. A dial from one reference may fit other cases, perhaps well or not. Dial variations were so numerous its often impossible to know with much certainty which dials were available in a given reference.

 

You might consider that movement and dial as well as the hands could be a put together too.

 

Similar dial found on a 265:

 

Appears to be a 9ct yellow gold Dennison case

 

Looks like it utilizes a 33 or 34 mm case instead of the 35mm ref 2800 case

 

Anyone know what the proper dial diameter is for ref 2800?

 

Whenever I'm unsure about specific dimensions, I look for a good, mainly straight picture and use a graphic software for scaling.

Here is such a picture of a 35 mm 2800 without crystal:



The outer red circle is 35 mm, the inner one is 32.5 mm in diameter.

So I'd vote for 32.5 mm.

 

I wish I can find literature to confirm this dial diameter. Anyone know where I’m likely to find it?