Speedmaster 145.022-69 Straight Writing 27.7M Serial ID

Posts
18
Likes
29
Wh
I think that the typical delivery date of the 27.7 serial is well known and while more examples are always good, they aren't needed. The ilovemyspeedmaster site obviously incorporates a significant number of these.

The operative question is whether a small batch of 27M movements were held back and delivered with SW examples in 1971. This is highly speculative, but if someone could provide an extract showing a 27.7M serial 145.022 delivered to Japan in 1971, it would be interesting.
Why Japan specifically?
 
Posts
24,510
Likes
54,469
Wh

Why Japan specifically?
IIRC, the vast majority of SW cases were delivered to Japan.
 
Posts
18
Likes
29
IIRC, the vast majority of SW cases were delivered to Japan.
Didn't know that. Thanks
 
Posts
24,510
Likes
54,469
Didn't know that. Thanks
Although it's possible that I am misremembering, and thinking only of the Apollo XI variant, which is not what you have. Sorry, I don't recall the details but I'm sure they're on the internet.
 
Posts
18
Likes
29
Although it's possible that I am misremembering, and thinking only of the Apollo XI variant, which is not what you have. Sorry, I don't recall the details but I'm sure they're on the internet.
Just another side tunnel in the rabbit hole to explore.
 
Posts
698
Likes
781
IIRC, the vast majority of SW cases were delivered to Japan.
The "Apollo XI" Straight Writing casebooks or all Straight Writings including "Flight Qualified?"
Edited:
 
Posts
6,256
Likes
21,384
Here's some reading on Straight writings:

The SW Apollo XI were Issued in Japan, not the SW Flight qualified. In Japan, the SW FQ are often referred to as rest of world.

Early SN movements are seen on SW FQ. It is problematic if we look at the timeline for how the casebacks evolved. I've come to think that there were early movements that were put into these watches and that they were sold years later. I have heard that Speedmasters weren't flying off the shelves back then so it's possible.

The OPs watch looks like it aged consistently. The lume has that dash 69 look.

My personal opinion is that it could have left the factory that way. I'm less definitive about serial number ranges than I used to be.
 
Posts
18
Likes
29
Here's some reading on Straight writings:

The SW Apollo XI were Issued in Japan, not the SW Flight qualified. In Japan, the SW FQ are often referred to as rest of world.

Early SN movements are seen on SW FQ. It is problematic if we look at the timeline for how the casebacks evolved. I've come to think that there were early movements that were put into these watches and that they were sold years later. I have heard that Speedmasters weren't flying off the shelves back then so it's possible.

The OPs watch looks like it aged consistently. The lume has that dash 69 look.

My personal opinion is that it could have left the factory that way. I'm less definitive about serial number ranges than I used to be.
Thanks.

What do you mean 'dash 69 look.'?
 
Posts
6,256
Likes
21,384
Thanks.

What do you mean 'dash 69 look.'?
Short-hand for the reference 145.022-69, i.e. dash 69.

The lume on these is often slightly dirty and faded yellow. The hands are often dark from age.
 
Posts
18
Likes
29
Short-hand for the reference 145.022-69, i.e. dash 69.

The lume on these is often slightly dirty and faded yellow. The hands are often dark from age.
Thanks.

It seems like there's actually very little consensus out there depending on which chart or database you reference. For example, if you look at the Moonwatch Only tables, they seem to group certain blocks (like the 27M serials) pretty rigidly into 1968. But then if you look at dealer charts like Menta Watches, they assign the entire 26M and 27M blocks strictly to 1969. And then the ILMS data throws another layer of estimation on top based on extract records.
Am I right in assuming a lot of these discrepancies just come down to the gap between when Lemania stamped the movement and when Omega actually cased and delivered the watch? It feels like treating these serial blocks as hard mathematical cut-offs might be a bit flawed given how parts bins, batch production, and factory assembly actually worked back then.
Just curious how you guys navigate these grey areas when the established charts contradict each other.

Not specifically pertaining to my piece. Just in general.
 
Posts
13,223
Likes
22,989
I’d trust MWO over any other reference point, by a large margin.
I’ve never seen any 27m in a 69 and although there are rumours of ‘rogue’ serial numbers, I’ve never seen any evidence.

A 27m has no place in a -69 as far as I’m concerned.
 
Posts
18
Likes
29
I’d trust MWO over any other reference point, by a large margin.
I’ve never seen any 27m in a 69 and although there are rumours of ‘rogue’ serial numbers, I’ve never seen any evidence.

A 27m has no place in a -69 as far as I’m concerned.
The authors of Moonwatch Only explicitly note in their addendums that they have observed 27.7M serials inside 145.022-69 configurations due to delayed factory assembly. Mainly offered for sale in 1974-75
 
Posts
13,223
Likes
22,989
The authors of Moonwatch Only explicitly note in their addendums that they have observed 27.7M serials inside 145.022-69 configurations due to delayed factory assembly. Mainly offered for sale in 1974-75
I haven’t noticed that in MWO.

I’m going to be contradictory here. Personally, I still don’t believe it. But I also put more weight on what MWO say than what I think, so I’d be inclined to recommend others go with MWO
 
Posts
18
Likes
29
I haven’t noticed that in MWO.

I’m going to be contradictory here. Personally, I still don’t believe it. But I also put more weight on what MWO say than what I think, so I’d be inclined to recommend others go with MWO
Here is the excerpt I referenced.