Ref. 105.012-66 CB movement reference question for experts

[Screwbacks]

cb66 serial numbers is few digits away from neil's.

 

[nonuffinkbloke]

COMPARISON OF VERY LATE IN THE SERIAL NUMBER RANGE 105.012-65:

I will throw mine into the ring just to add a comparison. Simon Freese told me my watch is very late for a 105.012-65. We have had my 105.012-65 in our family for around 50 years.

Original movement and 105.012-65 Case back is also original. (It had incorrect service hands, crown and bracelet fitted in the 1970's. Hands and crown corrected in 2017) Apart from that, the watch hasn't changed since I was a kid. I'm now a Grandfather, so that is a 50 years of family ownership.





It has a production date on the Omega Extract of the Archives of January 6th 1967 and the serial number is also confirmed by Omega.






The 321 movement serial, 24531×××, on my watch, is very late for this reference, but within range according to Moonwatch Only. Moowatch shows a slight overlap between the 105.012 -65 and the 105.012-66

Edited: Dec 6, 2020

 

[ortope]

This is exactly the point and the reason why I started the post.

Cheers

 

[nonuffinkbloke]

ortope

This is exactly the point and the reason why I started the post.

Cheers

I think the interesting thing abut the Moonwatch Only serial ranges is that they use the term "Movement numbers seen:"

Before the Moonwatch Only serial ranges were published, other Internet sources seemed to place my, very late serial, number out of range for a 105.012-65. I was a bit concerned, but fortunately we had a 50 year consistent family history and the Omega Extract to confirm that it was correct.

We can have a 105.012-65 at 24537xxx, and a 105.012-66 at 24533xxx. That seems to suggest that (within a reasonable range) there may be other (so far "unseen") movement numbers that could extend that overlap a tiny bit further.

Maybe the book, and other sources should say "Movement numbers seen SO FAR"

Edited: Dec 6, 2020

 

[Dan S]

ortope

This is exactly the point and the reason why I started the post.

ortope

Would therefore a 25.001.xxx movement be ok for a 105.012 from 1966 in the experts point of view?
Thank you

What is the point exactly? Can you clarify the question.

Above is the original question in the post, which is ambiguous. If you are asking whether that serial could be correct for a reference 105.012-66, then the answer is yes. However, if you are asking if it would likely have a production date in 1966 according to an extract, then the answer is no. That serial is dead-on for a 105.012-66, but would have been produced in 1967 or 1968.

I think that this is all explained clearly in MWO, the ilovemyspeedmaster website, etc. The final image from @nonuffinkbloke's post says it all. Just read it.

 

[nonuffinkbloke]

Dan S

What is the point exactly? Can you clarify the question.

Above is the original question in the post, which is ambiguous. If you are asking whether that serial could be correct for a reference 105.012-66, then the answer is yes. However, if you are asking if it would likely have a production date in 1966 according to an extract, then the answer is no. That serial is dead-on for a 105.012-66, but would have been produced in 1967 or 1968.

I think that this is all explained clearly in MWO, the ilovemyspeedmaster website, etc. The final image from @nonuffinkbloke's post says it all. Just read it.

Yes Dan, you are correct.

25.440xxx serial and a 105.012-66 case back is OK. So far so good. An Omega Extract with a 67 or 68 production date would be lovely!

Edited: Dec 6, 2020