Community Stories

Slight Differences in Omega Speedmaster MK40 triple day date

yousefsl
Posts
24
Likes
12
Hi all I was just wondering if anyone knows anything about the slight differences between the old MK40 models, I'm talking about the the colourful model with the blue AM/PM sub dial ref 3520.53.00, I have bought two over the years, the one on the right is dated 1997 with a serial number starting with 55 and the one on the left is dated 2005 with a serial number starting with 58

20160501_175056.jpg


As you can see I have changed the straps to preserve the originals.

The differences are quite hard to tell at first glance but if you look close enough you'll notice this
20160501_175439.jpg


The minute markers on the older model on the right are smoother and flush while the newer model has obvious indents at every minute, also if you compare the numbers and text it is much more finely printed on the newer model on the left, but one of the differences that isn't as clear on the picture is that the sapphire glass on the newer model isn't as clear as the old one, it has a slightly cloudy look about it.

As you can see from the original advertisement for the watch, the ad closer resembles my older model
ad1.jpg adresized2-small.jpg


Is this a sign of a fake? or did omega make some slight adjustments to it's model before they finally stopped production? I hope there is someone out there that knows more about this watch, Thank you for reading and I look forward to hearing what you all have to say about the differences between these two watches, thanks again!
 
Archer
Posts
27,930
Likes
71,133
During the production of this watch Omega switched from Tritium lume compound (on your older model) to Luminova compound (as on your newer model) and it appears that some other subtle changes were made to the dial at the same time.

I've checked on the Omega Extranet and the current replacement dial has the markers that look like your more modern watch, so I don't believe this is a fake dial.

Cheers, Al
 
yousefsl
Posts
24
Likes
12
Archer Archer
During the production of this watch Omega switched from Tritium lume compound (on your older model) to Luminova compound (as on your newer model) and it appears that some other subtle changes were made to the dial at the same time.

I've checked on the Omega Extranet and the current replacement dial has the markers that look like your more modern watch, so I don't believe this is a fake dial.

Cheers, Al

Thank very much for your reply That is great information much appreciated, I love the look of the old patina on this watch it gives it so much character, could I trouble you with one more question, I've been looking at this watch online it is for sale the picture isn't very clear
20160502_233628.png


I believe the reference number is 3523.30, everything looks ok with the watch but I haven't seen this model with the red crescent for the date markers I've only seen the red crescent on the blue dial version, I thought the white dial only came with the black crescent for the day indicator, the picture isn't the best I will contact the seller and try and get better pictures, thanks again for your help.

Best Regards
 
Archer
Posts
27,930
Likes
71,133
The 35233000 should not have the red crescent on the date hand - should be dark grey.
 
yousefsl
Posts
24
Likes
12
Archer Archer
The 35233000 should not have the red crescent on the date hand - should be dark grey.

Thank you for your reply, yes that was my suspicion, I think I will stay away from this watch, what do you think happened with this one? Do you think the date hand has been replaced? I will send the seller a message asking if he knows anything about why it's red instead of dark grey.

Thanks again again for your advice much appreciated.
 
yousefsl
Posts
24
Likes
12
Archer Archer
The 35233000 should not have the red crescent on the date hand - should be dark grey.

Another thing about this watch is the second hand is from the 35213000 model, correct me if I'm wrong but this watch looks like a mix between the 35233000 and the 35213000, the omega logo is recessed like on the 3523 but the second hand is like the 3521, the shop is located close by where I live I might pass by and have a word with the seller so see what he knows about the watch.
 
yousefsl
Posts
24
Likes
12
Archer Archer
The 35233000 should not have the red crescent on the date hand - should be dark grey.

I took some pictures of the watch in the shop, the seller says the watch is a Japanese market version, all the functions are working perfectly on the watch, scary do you think?
20160503_180315.jpg 20160503_180320(0).jpg


Thanks again!
 
Archer
Posts
27,930
Likes
71,133
Serial number appears to be 55174815 - if that is correct this watch has been modified from it's original state, as that serial number calls up a ref. 35218000 with the blue dial...

Cheers, Al
 
yousefsl
Posts
24
Likes
12
Archer Archer
Serial number appears to be 55174815 - if that is correct this watch has been modified from it's original state, as that serial number calls up a ref. 35218000 with the blue dial...

Cheers, Al

Thanks again for that info, I really appreciate your help, probably the dial has been changed by the previous owner, maybe he liked the red crescent with the white face, anyways thanks a million for your advice, have a great day!
 
A
Posts
1
Likes
0
My MK40 has the defined minute markers and was made in 1998 (56- serial) according to an online database. So your older one was supplanted pretty early in the run.
 
Fritzer
Posts
68
Likes
749
I'm currently looking closer at this watch for a possible future purchase. (40th birthday incomming, so MK40 seems the right choice 😉)
I love the speedmaster, but it's too big for my "vintage-sized" wrists. I don't realy love de reduced, especially the movement. This seems like a perfect sized watch, and good addition to my current collection. I love the looks and the movement with all its complications.
Looking at some advertisements, I see 2 different references:
(1) 35205300
(2) 38205326

Is reference nr 1 for the older one (and thus tritium lume)? Are there more references? > any idea's on this?
I tend to like the tritium lume a bit more, because it ages more beautiful. > what's your opinion on this?
 
S
Posts
5
Likes
1
Fritzer Fritzer
I'm
(1) 35205300
(2) 38205326
Is reference nr 1 for the older one (and thus tritium lume)? Are there more references? > any idea's on this?
I’m in the same boat with you. Also turning 40 and have been researching this quite a bit. It seems that the first reference you mention is the metal bracelet version and the latter one with the strap. So based on my research, these have nothing to do with the tritium etc. Serials 55xxx seem to be older, from the 1990s and 58xxx from the mid-2000s (towards the end of production). Somewhere around 56xxx they seem to have updated the dial a bit with clearer minute markers etc. Maybe this was where they switched from tritium to luminova?
 
Fritzer
Posts
68
Likes
749
S speedster999
Maybe this was where they switched from tritium to luminova?
Yes, that appears to be the case. Like @Archer said above.
My savings are reaching their goal...so probably incoming the next 2 months somewhere for me.

My favorite would be one with tritium lume and metal bracelet, but it depends on what will be for sale the next couple of months (and at what price and location). Maybe one without bracelet is an option too (and then buy a separate bracelet) But the price our local AD asked for a replacement bracelet (1000 euro's) is not an option for me. Is this a normal price? Seems a bit too much to me.
 
leichtundkross
Posts
2
Likes
4
Hi guys,
I know this is an older thread but I have some insights to share with you.

After months of research I finally found my MK40 last week. I was lucky to find one in almost NOS condition:

IMG_6270.jpg


Reference numbers
There are two reference numbers: 3520.53.00 and 3820.53.26. The first reference is for the model with steel bracelet, the second one is used for the version with leather strap.
Please refer to the schema of Omega PIC Numbers (https://www.bobswatches.com/rolex-blog/resources/guide-omega-pic-numbers-explained.html)

Dial configuration
I have checked dozens of offers that brings me to this conclusion:
As stated above it seems that there are two dials that differ in some details
- MK I: Use of Tritium (and therefore we see a nice yellowish patina nowadays), fat minute markers every 5 minutes
- MK II: Use of Luminova, fat and long minute markers every minute

I have seen the MK I dials until serial number 558xxxxx. The earliest MK II dials I have seen start with serial number 560xxxxx. Using various sites for Omega serial numbers the 560xxxxx dates back to 1998. So, I guess that there was an update of the dial around 1997/1998. This again matches the facts from above.

PS: Personally, I love the vinate look of the tritium indices. However, the newer minute markers have a better readability (by far!)
 
N
Posts
2
Likes
1
Might be a long shot given the date of this thread, but I just purchased a 3520.53. everything looks legit but my serial starts with 590xxxxx, has anyone seen anything like that? I thought it stopped with 589xxxxx, happy to add pictures if needed.
 
leichtundkross
Posts
2
Likes
4
The serial number ranges that I provided are based on approximately 20-30 observations. So, I guess your piece is perfectly fine and the switch was somewhere in the 590xxxxx range. In addition, I am pretty sure that you’ll even find a short transition phase with some MK I pieces having a higher serial number than a MK II configuration.

PS: I guess you are talking about your dial (it’s not stated in your post)
PS2: Congratulations to one of the best Speedies out there.
 
padders
Posts
9,931
Likes
15,597
The harlequin Mk40 is not unique in transitioning over from tritium to Superluminova in late 1997/ early 1998, all Omegas did since they phased tritium lume out at that point. It is unusual that they changed the dial design slightly when they did so, usually the dial stayed the same but the lume changed. At first it wouldn't have been all that noticeable but 20-25 years later it is clear which is which. The Dynamic gen 3 chrono is also another model where the tritium dial differs slightly in the sub dials from the SL dial version.
 
S
Posts
2
Likes
0
I just purchased a mk40 3520.53. I'm wondering if mine has a service dial. The serial starts 559 dating it to 1995 but it has the luminova dial with the longer minute marks. I have attached a photo. When I check the serials and year of production I see 1995 against this serial but no 1996 or 1997 which means it could have been made in any one of these three years? I'm wondering if I have one of the earliest luminova dials or whether it is a service dial? Any ideas? Thanks!
 
IMG_4714.jpeg
S
Posts
2
Likes
0
leichtundkross leichtundkross
Hi guys,
I know this is an older thread but I have some insights to share with you.

After months of research I finally found my MK40 last week. I was lucky to find one in almost NOS condition:

IMG_6270.jpg


Reference numbers
There are two reference numbers: 3520.53.00 and 3820.53.26. The first reference is for the model with steel bracelet, the second one is used for the version with leather strap.
Please refer to the schema of Omega PIC Numbers (https://www.bobswatches.com/rolex-blog/resources/guide-omega-pic-numbers-explained.html)

Dial configuration
I have checked dozens of offers that brings me to this conclusion:
As stated above it seems that there are two dials that differ in some details
- MK I: Use of Tritium (and therefore we see a nice yellowish patina nowadays), fat minute markers every 5 minutes
- MK II: Use of Luminova, fat and long minute markers every minute

I have seen the MK I dials until serial number 558xxxxx. The earliest MK II dials I have seen start with serial number 560xxxxx. Using various sites for Omega serial numbers the 560xxxxx dates back to 1998. So, I guess that there was an update of the dial around 1997/1998. This again matches the facts from above.

PS: Personally, I love the vinate look of the tritium indices. However, the newer minute markers have a better readability (by far!)


As an update to what you added here, I have a mk11 dial with a serial starting 559. It could be original but it could also be a service dial - not sure
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

W

Slight Differences in hands Omega Seamaster Soccer timer 145.019

wiseinvestor Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
flqt-9000
flqt-9000
Posts
3
Views
4K
sgrossma

Omega Speedmaster Automatic MK40 Triple Day Date 3520

sgrossma Watches For Sale
sgrossma
sgrossma
Posts
0
Views
4K
jB1128

Omega Speedmaster Day-Date MK40 3820.53 “Schumacher” | Boxes + Papers

jB1128 Private Watch Sales
jB1128
jB1128
Posts
14
Views
11K
tomvox1

Vintage 1961 Omega Speedmaster ref. 2998-3 cal. 321 w/ Stunning Dial, Extract, 7912 Bracelet

tomvox1 Watches For Sale
tomvox1
tomvox1
Posts
1
Views
9K
boogedyboo

SOLD Omega Speedmaster MK40 Triple Calendar 3520.53.00

boogedyboo Private Watch Sales
boogedyboo
boogedyboo
Posts
2
Views
3K
Lonestar

Omega Speedmaster Day-Date Mk40 "Schumacher" 3820.53.

Lonestar Private Watch Sales
Lonestar
Lonestar
Posts
4
Views
9K