To me, any of the Speedmasters that have a 321 movement ticking away inside are in a class of their own... BUT
It would seem that
@Spacefruit may have given us a clue as to why the 'running' to 'good' prices of the 145.012 are below the 105.012 and sit closer to the 145.022.
(Quote from the Speedmaster101 assessment guide on the 145.012)
'This is the most affordable 321 Speedmaster, and consequently it spend the longest time languishing in sub $1000 territory. (Some while ago now!) This value made them uneconomic to service, so care must be exercised in choosing one that has not been neglected.'
(End of quote)
If I understand this correctly, it means you are more likely to find watches with and uncertain or poor service history in this reference and that effects the value???
Doesn't that also kind of suggest that a really good 145.012 would be rarer and sit in a better price bracket? If you take a look at the collectors condition 145.012, they are way up over $11,500. That's $2,000 dearer than any 145.022.
Having said all that, as the owner of a 1965 105.012 I should be even more put out because a 'good' 105.003 of the same year is worth $5,800 more than a 105.012!
Personally, I'm not keen on the early references unprotected pushers but then the straight lug Speedys are very tasteful. I just think (In my humble opinion) that the 105.012 with it's asymetric case, short pushers and lyre lugs took the Speedmaster design to a higher level of elegance.
Anyway...If I've got this wrong let me know.
馃槙
