Hi, I´d like to know if there´s something wrong with this watch. I noticed that it has 564 cal. instead of 561 inside a 168.005 case. But the most impressive is that the Dial seems to be new. What you think guys? Thanks
Late 168.005s can have 564s. They are often found with minty dials, depending on the climate of their residence. Here is mine, also with a 564
Some have it, some don't. So long there aren't holes in the dial where the marker used to be, you should be OK. gatorcpa
I've seen the best stainless examples of the 168.005 sell for that price. They had a logo strap with logo buckle and a Beads of Rice included too though.
I've seen them go around that figure...would want one in pretty exceptional condition and serviced for that amount though!
What's the correct lenght size for the hands of this whatch?. I saw the diameter is 1.50 / 0.80 / 0.18
Going from sheer face value, it looks correct to me. The second hand length could very well be the angle it was shot at....As the omega logo in the crystal is off centre too. Here's my 168.005 for comparison: