Hello OF - I have been seeking a birth year watch and a 145.012-67 would be one I would consider. I have been offered the piece below. I’m somewhat comfortable using Spacefruit’s Speedmaster 101 blog/ price chart (Thank you!) and have researched that and other resources so I’m not looking at these totally “blind”. That said, I need help from you fine gents.

My (potential) concerns on this one - uncertain I am - are:

•Relumed markers
•Speedmaster Font on dial looks odd
•Bezel ghosting looks unnatural
•A few movement screws and bridges look hacked up or aftermarket
•Serial number looks low for a -67

So I turn to you. I look forward to your feedback Thanks in advance. Below are the pics

 

1. Hard to tell from these pics but markers don’t look bad to me - need closer + more in focus pics, but the color is attractive - even then, it’s usually very hard to be definitive about re-luming.
2. What looks odd to you? I can’t see anything wrong at first glance from these pics, but I don’t have any 145.012s or MWO to hand
3. I don’t know, it looks nice to my eye, and not inconsistent with others I have seen. But you have to like it if you are going to plonk down serious $
4. Yes - but if it works, not too much of a problem, depending on the all important factor :
5. How much is it?

 

I don't see a problem with the bezel or the font on the dial.

It's hard to say about the lume, but I can understand your concern, because it seems so even and perfect. Try to get more photos and maybe some information about how it fades after UV exposure.

Ilovemyspeedmaster.com puts that serial in late 1966, so that could be an issue. An extract could come back with a 105.012. Of course, maybe that wouldn't be the end of the world if you bought it at a 145.012 price.

Are you ok with the extent of polishing on the lugs? It looks pretty aggressive.

 

You might find something useful here: https://omegaforums.net/threads/omega-speedmaster-145-012-67-advice-needed.83725/

This was a very educational thread for me, my weakest point is to tell relumes from original. Many established members weighed in that thread so perhaps you can see what you think about the lume.

I as well am pretty skeptical about the ghost bezel...hmm....very uniform lume + ghost bezel = ???
My first guess would be that it's been prepped in some way (though not sure to what extent)..

Also you can see there was some engraving on the caseback that was erased. That suggests after the watch changed hands, it was touched in some way...

 

Hi,

A few observations:

- Serial (24006859?) would according to MWO fall into the 105.012 range, rather than the 145.012 range.
- Case looks a little soft and shiny, but overall not so bad.
- Dial looks okay to me. Slightly suspiciously yellowish lume, but if it would be a relume, it has been done nicely for sure.
- Bezel is indeed a bit strangely ghosted.

Just to be sure; what does the inside of the caseback look like? And please do not forget that casebacks occasionally would get swapped; so you might indeed be looking at something else than a 145.012-67 here.

Price would be an interesting factor for sure, I would be surprised if it comes cheaply. If only because someone has clearly made an effort for it to look as nice as it can possibly be...

 

It looks prepared to me.

For certain the case has been badly over polished, yet the sides have been rebrushed, so there's indication of some level of tinkering or preparation there. The lume color looks odd to me at a near mustard yellow, and its not very common to see hands that age exactly the same as the dial - or exactly the same as one another for that matter (for instance, the hour hand very often ages a bit darker than the rest). Get more pictures/video, as others have suggested. Maybe that will prove me wrong, but I don't love it.

 

It screams prepped watch to me. Looks a lot like some of the Italian artists work. Caseback has been skimmed and respun to remove an engraving would be my guess, dial relumed, bezel bleached. No Sir, I don't like it. The serial being wrong for the case is the icing on the cake. Nice looking put together, nice to wear if cheap enough but it won't be because cheap enough would be around £2-3K

 

Gentlemen,

please allow me to contribute my own input here.

I do not agree that the 24 million serial number falls always into the 105.012 range. Over the years and in the quest of finding my own grail (145.012-67) i have added over 2.000 photos in my personal Speedmaster archive, concerning nearly all of the existing cal. 321 references.

All i can say is that the oldest 145.012-67 serial number that i have is 240130XX followed by 240678XX and 245328XX and next comes the 25 million photos..."Moonwatch only" seems to agree with the above observation as well.

By the way, i consider the above a quite nice specimen (perhaps apart from the slightly overpolished case) providing that the price is right IMHO it does really worth a try.

X

 

Uhuh but the watch above is 24.00m so still earlier than your range.

 

Looking at that serial more closely. The font of the digits looks very wrong to me, too curly if you see what I mean. I think it has been altered and stupidly altered too early.

 

Correct, but it will not be the first time that Omega uses a slightly "older" movement in a case that is rather a bit "younger", and i am not talking about abysmal case-movement differences here...

X

 

Understood but see my next point. You have many pictures of serials, compare the one above with the font used in yours and tell me what you see.

 

Agree, regarding the "2".



One of my pics, for comparison.

X

 

100% Relume

look at the colour, the homogeneous nature of the lume, all through the plots as well as the lume inserts on the hands - which match 100%.

Also that yellow....its a bit strong!

The plots show no decay, and yet the bezel faded, and the case got so worn it needed a polish.

Its a very stinky watch.

And whatever is going on with that movement number, I have never seen 2400xxxx in a 145.012.

 

It looks almost wet at the back.

 

I like it.


Just kidding.

When you pull together all the potential issues: the perfectly uniform and overly yellow lume, perfectly matching hands, very soft case that happens to have rebrushed sides, questionable serial, clear signs of a removed engraving on the back, evenly faded bezel.

This has been prepared for sale.

Nothing wrong with that as long as you know how much. Has it just been repolished (very averagely), and relumed. That's not the end of the world as long as the buyer is aware.

However with this one I get the feeling there may have been much more to it.

 

Pass on this one. That guy has been trying to sell that watch for like 7 months. Listen to everyone above that stated all the problems.

 

Lume looks way too perfect. Would have been fine if it was fully disclosed to be relumed.

I also do not like that gap between the strap (assuming the strap is 20mm) and the lugs, seems to indicate significant metal loss.

 

I always wonder when a ghost bezel is lighter on the inside...

My theory on them is it wear from a corse long sleeve which in theory would make the inside darker. But many and oddly blues are lighter on the inside sometimes.

Then again mines even...

I default/ defer to @Spacefruit on it. It’s looks nice I’ll admit.

 

My theory is a professional watch preparer cleaned it in acetone or dropped it in bleach or left it in the oven for a spell. Or all 3.