Forums Latest Auctions Members

Seamaster movements fitted in a Speedmaster from factory.

  1. DLT222

    DLT222 Double D @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    4,855
    Likes
    3,525
    EEEEEEEK I hear you say!!

    Hold out...

    So yesterday I ran a serial with Omega on a very special watch, I will withhold the details of it as per request of the actual current owner.

    Now the serial came back as fitted to a Seamaster 145.005, but the watch in question was sold new to the present owner, it also has the original box and docs stamped by the original supplying dealer in the late 60s. It's actually fitted to a Speedmaster.

    This is where the issue arises. We know the watch was bought new, it has also never ever been serviced by anyone so there is no chance of any parts being changed at any service in any point in its life. Having spoken to Charles at the Omega Museum, he kindly explained that some watches in the 60s were fitted with movements destined for say a seamaster but actually fitted to a speedmaster. He goes on to say that this was due to several factors like the actual reference that the movement was originally made for was not selling well so production was stopped and the movements were fitted in other cases that would accommodate that movement.

    The only downside is that Omega made note of the serial number as being fitted to a Seamaster in the archives but it was actually never fitted to a Seamaster and it was ultimately fitted to a speedmaster. Now we know that the watch has been in the same ownership from new, the only time the watch has been opened is to gain the actual serial for an extract of archives.

    Today, I was contacted by someone who has a Straight Writing with the same issue. The movement was originally destined for a Seamaster but fitted to a Speedmaster. When you cross reference the serial it comes back as an 861 from a Speedy on I Love My Speedmaster.

    This makes me think just how many more are out there. It seems to be the movements from 67-69. It's clear that there is more than one speedy with this issue.

    We simply can't call them franken's because they left the factory like this and an extract is now not available and a refund is not an option.

    Interesting to know what you guys think.
     
    Edited Dec 4, 2019
    Risto, WYO_Watch and noelekal like this.
  2. harrymai86

    harrymai86 Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    822
    Likes
    1,856
    May I ask if the original paper has serie number on it when purchased?
     
    kkt, Davidt, simonsays and 1 other person like this.
  3. simonsays

    simonsays Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    795
    Likes
    1,008
    I love my Speedmaster will always suggest a Speedmaster reference of appropriate age to the serial number. It has no info to say it is a Speedmaster, it assumes you are checking that watch or you would go to I love my Seamaster instead.
     
    watchyouwant, Foo2rama and kov like this.
  4. southtexas

    southtexas Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    463
    Likes
    534
    To the believer, it makes sense.

    To the cynic, it is convenient hearsay.

    And the band marches on!
     
    watchyouwant, Baz9614 and SwissZ like this.
  5. dennisthemenace

    dennisthemenace Hey, he asked for it! Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    2,301
    Likes
    3,142
    Well, this certainly opens a can of worms.
    This thread is going to be interesting.
     
  6. DLT222

    DLT222 Double D @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    4,855
    Likes
    3,525
    yes both the papers and serial are the same. It was bought new.
     
  7. DLT222

    DLT222 Double D @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    4,855
    Likes
    3,525

    The way it builds the database upon thousands of serials i have seen the reference suggest no ‘Moonwatch’ when searching.
     
  8. MCC

    MCC Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    454
    Likes
    361
    If these are genuine then it casts a real doubt on Omega's record keeping ::popcorn::
     
    noelekal, DLT222 and southtexas like this.
  9. DLT222

    DLT222 Double D @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    4,855
    Likes
    3,525

    I am having that very discussion right now!

    Its like this...

    Lets say movement no 25345678 was originally made for a seamaster but that specific model seamaster was not selling well and production ceased, instead of altering the archives to say the movement was fitted to a speedmaster, it was just fitted and sent to the AD, then Mr ABC came in and bought it, he either kept it for his entire life like the one I've just cross checked yesterday or at some point he sold it on in year (INSTER YEAR HERE ;)) and then now we can apply for an extract which is moderately a new thing to do, they are coming back and saying that its not the right watch when in reality it was always placed in that watch from the start and has lived in that watch till this very day.
     
    PaulHelmuth, Eve, Samir and 1 other person like this.
  10. Baz9614

    Baz9614 Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    1,679
    Likes
    16,712
    Why is the owner requesting an extract if he’s the original owner and already knows it’s complete story?
     
    Foo2rama and Samir like this.
  11. Rodsch

    Rodsch Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    151
    Likes
    118
    i have the same issue with my 69 racing speedy. I know for 100% that my dad bought it like it is in 1969 in an AD in Switzerland. He gave it to me after i graduated from school.
    As i requested an EoA, Omega stated that the movement does not fit to my Speedy....
    So i was very disappointed and could not really believe Omega and also talked to the heritage staff but, he wasn´t able to gather any more information.
     
  12. DLT222

    DLT222 Double D @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    4,855
    Likes
    3,525
    It's the Straight Writing that has had an extract applied for and come back as a seamaster reference. The other watch has been owned since new and also come back as a seamaster. Now I know of another one thats the same.

    Also, why wouldn't you apply for an extract even if you have owned it from new? Its what some people look for right on some vintage watches, but it seems we cannot always go by the EoA now.
     
    chronoboy64 and Baz9614 like this.
  13. Andy K

    Andy K Dreaming about winning an OFfie one day. Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    1,660
    Likes
    5,308
    This unfortunately isn't too surprising, it seems the more that is learned about Omega's records the more gaps, inconsistencies, and grey areas appear.
     
  14. Basset Hound

    Basset Hound Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    223
    Likes
    379
    But there’s no way of distinguishing a watch that left the factory like that from a franken unless it is accompanied by the original papers which quote the movement number?
     
    Samir likes this.
  15. DLT222

    DLT222 Double D @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    4,855
    Likes
    3,525
    Nope. Im sure that people will think that watches that left the factory with the movement that was destined for a seamaster fitted at the factory in a speedy will immediately rule it as a franken, but its becoming clear this is not the case with what we are finding out here.

    Omega have openly said that their archives are not complete, missing information and possibly now not correct on some references.

    Also remember that these watches were made completely different back then to how they are made today to cope with todays demand so time pretty sure this will not happen with the strict criteria that is running today. I would also not limit this to Omega perhaps, but who knows.
     
    ndgal, noelekal and gefmey like this.
  16. gefmey

    gefmey Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    169
    Likes
    313
    It's also good to remember that in the late 60's-70's the Swiss watch industry was just being hit by the quartz/Japan avalanche. Keeping track of movement numbers and exactly what watch they were used in for posterity was probably not high on their priority list. You see this over and over with companies that after several decades, find their products "collectable heirlooms". Honestly it's nice to see that they still have records at all. My research into a Longines/Wittnauer watch reached a dead end because Wittnauer, having gone through many corporate changes, has no records to speak of, at all and does not apparently have anyone in customer service who knows anything about watches either.
     
    Edward53, noelekal, olerofe and 2 others like this.
  17. airansun

    airansun Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    1,558
    Likes
    12,433


    Omega caught red-handed, so to speak? (Think Ultraman)
     
    Spacefruit likes this.
  18. DLT222

    DLT222 Double D @ ΩF Staff Member Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    4,855
    Likes
    3,525
    I wouldn't say they have been busted so to speak. Like @gefmey said above, those years were not like it is today in terms of control etc. I have a 2998 and a 105.012-64 that they have no record for at all.

    Its just how things were run back then, shame we are just discovering it now though.
     
    gefmey likes this.
  19. MRC

    MRC Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    1,054
    Likes
    2,683
    Heuer are in a worse position. Apparently all paper records are long lost, but there are some physical examples of e.g. dials kept
    [​IMG]
    http://www.onthedash.com/vintage-heuer-collectors-summit-2013/


    In small production, and Omega were small in real terms, this sort of case/movement thing doesn't surprise me at all. When everything comes from different suppliers who will each have different batch sizes, delivery schedules and be subject to cockups of their own nothing is consistent and the operating principle is often "get them out the door -- we need the money!".
     
  20. gefmey

    gefmey Dec 4, 2019

    Posts
    169
    Likes
    313
    +1