Speedmaster 105: long short T

Posts
2,364
Likes
4,689
Hi guys, can you please share your knowledge about the long / short T-versions. I see long and short ones around 67 / 68 versions.

Any facts (year/SN/ dial/ ..)


willing to learn & merci , Jo
 
Posts
2,097
Likes
4,207
I think you mean “close T” ( your bottom photo) and “spaced T” ( your top photo)

Here goes- My understanding:

T on Speedmaster dials first noted on 105.003 ref in 1963. They were close T.
105.012 in 1963 were close T, I n some cases asymmetrical T and in rare cases no T.
105.012-64 and -65 were mostly close T until late production 1966-67 when first appearance of spaced t.
145.012-67 and -68 were spaced t
145-022 -68 and-68 spaced t.

Above subject to corrections by many OFers with more knowledge than I!
 
Posts
5,212
Likes
47,633
Looks like a 'Close T' to me: -66; SN 24,95x,xxx; extract says shipped in September 1967

 
Posts
2,097
Likes
4,207
Looks like a 'Close T' to me: -66; SN 24,95x,xxx; extract says shipped in September 1967

Close t for 105.012-66 rare (early ones) , spaced t more common (MWO)- but production date of dial may be different that caseback stamp and also movement SN- and certainly earlier than extract shipped date.
 
Posts
2,364
Likes
4,689
at C24 with EoA we have today:

8x short/close (1x63, 3x65, 2x66, 1x67)

6x long/spaced (2x67, 2x68, 1x66)

voilà: 1967 seems to be the date of this change
Edited:
 
Posts
11,872
Likes
38,728
counter opinion 🙄

spaced/long from 1964
1964 was the year the laws changed to require dial markings for tritium. Many of the 105.012-64s had dials that were produced prior to the passage of the law and thus had no T's, so they had to hand-paint them. Chances are if you looked up close (and that dial was original) you might see some asymmetry. I have a 105.012-64 with asymmetric T's myself.
 
Posts
9,877
Likes
15,521
counter opinion 🙄

spaced/long from 1964



https://stories.omegaforums.net/why-i-wrote-100-articles-before-covering-any-speedmaster/

should be discussed ;-)
Surely the most likely scenario there is a later dial swap? I can't say I have noticed any other wide spaced Ts before the -66 model (and corresponding 1967 production date). The one you show is a unicorn. AFAIK as noted above, the -66 iteration was the changeover.
 
Posts
11,872
Likes
38,728
Surely the most likely scenario there is a later dial swap? I can't say I have noticed any other wide spaced Ts before the -66 model (and corresponding 1967 production date). The one you show is a unicorn. AFAIK as noted above, the -66 iteration was the changeover.
This would be my guess too. Interestingly with the -66s, I've noticed that most of the CB cases have wide-spaced Ts but the HFs tend to have narrow Ts. But I've never seen a -65 or earlier with a provably original wide T dial
 
Posts
1,967
Likes
3,974
This would be my guess too. Interestingly with the -66s, I've noticed that most of the CB cases have wide-spaced Ts but the HFs tend to have narrow Ts. But I've never seen a -65 or earlier with a provably original wide T dial
Same with mine!

😀


 
Posts
587
Likes
604
There is a confirmed last batch of 105.012-65s from early 1967 that have appeared with wide T dials. I bought one last year and thought it had a service dial, but have since come across many similar examples.

24.537.XXX serial
 
Posts
11,881
Likes
20,653
I agree the changeover was contemporary to the -66 CB in 66/67. A wide spaced T before this or narrow spaced T after this is highly likely to have had a dial swap