Forums Latest Members

Seeking insight on a 145.022-69 with applied logo dial.

  1. Bakertime Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    148
    Likes
    1,216
    Hello OF,

    I have this Omega Speedmaster stamped 145.022-69 ST on the inner case back. The movement serial is 29606036. However, the dial is applied logo with long hour indices. In my research this is incorrect and the movement and serial are for a -69.

    Is it simple enough to just assume that an earlier dial was put on at a service or another situation occurred.

    If anyone has some insight to share it would be greatly appreciated.

    Best regards,
    AWBaker
     
    B54D6C5B-C626-4598-B3BA-24C55E156720.jpeg 8DEABF7A-5706-4041-BE94-E6BA6D66B1DE.jpeg DC74D3AC-27B9-44EF-B79B-12848E8688E7.jpeg
  2. BenBagbag Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    2,820
    Likes
    8,983
    It's either a 145.022-68 dial or someone recut the feet of a 321 cal dial. Right? Dials from 321's don't fit on 861's unless resized?
     
    gemini4 and Bakertime like this.
  3. rcs914 Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    2,496
    Likes
    3,588
    Looks like you have a transitional dial, unless someone chopped the 321 feet, as already mentioned. While it may not be correct for a 69, I know for myself I'd leave it as is since that dial is far more attractive than the later ones.
     
    Bakertime and airansun like this.
  4. Bakertime Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    148
    Likes
    1,216
    It doesn’t appear that the feet have been cut, but I can double check. It will remain this way and be worn/enjoyed.
     
  5. Davidt Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    10,309
    Likes
    17,881
    The movement serial puts it square in -69 territory so I'd assume the most likely scenario is it's a -69 with a -68 861 dial incorrectly installed at some point.
     
    Bakertime likes this.
  6. OMEGuy Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
    This dial doesn't match the reference and has most likely been swapped for whatever reason. So what? Watch looks great! Wear and enjoy it every day! :)
     
    wagudc and Bakertime like this.
  7. MikiJ Likes songs about Purple spices Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    2,843
    Likes
    2,386
    Can we possibly think that the wrong case back was installed at some sort of service along the way?
     
    wagudc, Bakertime and watchknut like this.
  8. OMEGuy Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
    Yes. Was my first thought. But the movement # is out of range, I think.
     
    joe band, Bakertime and watchknut like this.
  9. MikiJ Likes songs about Purple spices Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    2,843
    Likes
    2,386
    Maybe and maybe not. I'm sure one of our more knowledgeable members will be able to let you know for sure.
     
    Bakertime likes this.
  10. OMEGuy Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    2,086
    Likes
    2,783
    Yes. Without any doubt there are a lot more knowledgeable members here.

    From what I know, the 145.022-68 serials end within the 27.3 mio. range. That's why I think the OP's watch is more a '69/'70 candidate.
     
    gemini4 and Bakertime like this.
  11. ck77 Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    60
    Likes
    71
    upload_2019-1-4_9-41-33.png
    From ilovemyspeedmaster's prediction.
    Of course the most accurate info will be from the Extract.
     
    Bakertime likes this.
  12. Foo2rama Keeps his worms in a ball instead of a can. Jan 3, 2019

    Posts
    17,045
    Likes
    25,211
    Something smells off
     
    Spacefruit likes this.
  13. Davidt Jan 4, 2019

    Posts
    10,309
    Likes
    17,881
    The back matches the serial so for the dial to be wrong, no other parts need to have been changed.
    For the back to be the unoriginal item, the movement or at least the bridge also requires changing.
     
    Bakertime likes this.
  14. omegastar Jan 4, 2019

    Posts
    1,836
    Likes
    5,322
  15. Bakertime Jan 4, 2019

    Posts
    148
    Likes
    1,216
    Correct, dials from 321’s don’t fit 821’s. It isn’t obvious feet were cut, I’ll have to disassemble to see that. Thank you for the comment.
     
  16. stefman Jan 5, 2019

    Posts
    384
    Likes
    686
    Even if not accurate, i think it looks great!
     
    wagudc likes this.
  17. Shez Aug 29, 2021

    Posts
    9
    Likes
    12
    Hello, sorry to revive this thread after so long but I have the exact same question with a watch I just purchased, i.e an 861 with 27,3x serial number and 145.022-69ST stamped on the caseback, but with the applied logo and long indices of the 321 dial.

    Do you think a small batch of these may have left the factory with the older dial? It has an extract from omega stating the date of production as march 69, and the serial puts it squarely in the 'transitional' window.
     
    2021_0828_05184500_edit_18323370552411.jpg 2021_0828_05191700_edit_18229244697217.jpg 2021_0828_05301200_edit_18521591960193.jpg Screenshot_20210829_112345.jpg Screenshot_20210828_174933_com.chrono24.mobile.jpg
  18. joe band Aug 29, 2021

    Posts
    520
    Likes
    398
    never say never from omega, but i'd be inclined to guess a swapped caseback. 145.022-68 is my guess.
    wear it and enjoy
     
    gemini4 likes this.
  19. gemini4 Hoarder Of Speed et alia Aug 29, 2021

    Posts
    5,855
    Likes
    16,579
    +1
    I’ve seen numerous 273xxxxx 145.022-68.
    Production date is consistent with a 68.
     
    Dan S likes this.
  20. Shez Aug 29, 2021

    Posts
    9
    Likes
    12
    Thanks for your response! So your opinion is that the caseback has been swapped at some point?