Forums Latest Members
  1. Meelypops Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    163
    Likes
    136
    Hi guys,

    Is this a redial? Thoughts were it's the wrong crown.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Shabbaz Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    4,880
    Likes
    17,830
    Pictures?
     
  3. Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    26,343
    Likes
    65,053
    [​IMG]
     
    Vicke and dan7800 like this.
  4. Meelypops Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    163
    Likes
    136
    Damn uploads!
     
  5. Meelypops Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    163
    Likes
    136
    Second attempt provided below.
     
  6. dan7800 Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    803
    Likes
    811
    What do you think about it? (I am no expert, but there are certain things to be looking for in a connie)
     
  7. Shabbaz Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    4,880
    Likes
    17,830
  8. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,629
    I recommended it to someone else. Dial looks good. Crown might be original also. Later versions did not have 10-sides crowns.

    Bracelet is Omega, but not for this watch.
    gatorcpa
     
    Gstp and Meelypops like this.
  9. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    Nice looking watch.
     
  10. ConElPueblo Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,961
    ::confused2::

    Surely this one is supposed to have the slim decagonal crown?
     
  11. Meelypops Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    163
    Likes
    136
    That was my guess also
     
  12. STANDY schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collector Dec 29, 2017

    Posts
    16,311
    Likes
    44,718
    Dog-leg lugs and that dial :thumbsup:

    168 005 ? Could be one of several crowns IIRC
     
  13. ConElPueblo Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,961
    Which? This thread is the first time I've heard anyone mention this.
     
  14. Noddyman Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    1,116
    Likes
    1,771
    Don’t confuse me even further, just about getting my head around thin decagon, thick decagon and scalloped crowns and which models they belong to:)
     
  15. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,629
    I’ve mentioned it several times before.

    E6BEB499-0B3C-4D8B-AA78-4397C86310DE.jpeg

    I think that prior to 1965, the crown above is an acceptable alternative. After 1965, the crown on the steel eBay is the alternate.

    I’ve seen enough of these with the alternate styles to say it can’t just be a coincidence.

    Besides, the thin 10-sided crowns tend to wear down a bit and are very hard to grip.
    gatorcpa
     
  16. ConElPueblo Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,961
    I remember your post in my earlier thread re. Constellation crowns and don't agree with you completely.

    The crown you show on the above photo is thicker than the scalloped style that I am used to see on pre-six-digit Constellation references (more specifically on 14.XXX references):

    [​IMG]


    Here shown with a similar type crown on a fifties 30mm Omega.

    [​IMG]

    Also, your example is the only Constellation with dog-leg lugs I remember seeing with a scallop-type crown - the ones I have ever encountered have been on lyre lugged specimen. While it is tempting for me to go so far to say that the decagonal crown and dog-leg lugs always go together, I realise that this might not be the case. I have, however, never seen convincing arguments in favour of anything else.

    All that being said, surely we can agree on the specific crown on this specific Constellation is a clear case of a service item? It sticks out like a sore thumb.


    Oh yes, it is amongst the least user-friendly design to ever see the light of day. On that we agree!
     
  17. gatorcpa ΩF InvestiGator Staff Member Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    12,168
    Likes
    15,629
    Service item, quite possibly. I don't think there is a shot of the logo on the crown. You can get a idea of how old it is from the logo.
    Clear? Far from that.

    My watch has an older style logo, so if it was replaced, it likely was early on in its life. My watch is also 14K, not 18K, and a US market model ("OXG)".
    gatorcpa
     
    Edited Dec 30, 2017
  18. ConElPueblo Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    9,587
    Likes
    26,961
    The 14K 168.005s are uncharted territory for me and looking at the overall condition it does seem rather odd that the crown should have been replaced. Unless it had been sitting in a drawer and kept wound by a manservant every day for ten years :D
     
  19. Peemacgee Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungers Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    5,127
    Likes
    7,836
    Did someone say 14k dogleg?:)
    3E4E705C-6AE9-4A9B-9B9C-BDC8A8C61446.jpeg
     
  20. STANDY schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collector Dec 30, 2017

    Posts
    16,311
    Likes
    44,718
    Same crown as @gatorcpa
    image.jpeg
     
    gatorcpa, ConElPueblo and Peemacgee like this.