Offered here:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/A-RARE-OMEG...263031?hash=item4402d497b7:g:3UoAAOSww9xZChayPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
Looks like a cal 321, but the T's have definitely been added.
Who by?
I bought and returned a watch last year from Europe that had these T marks. Either this is the same dial, or there is more than one of them


It is possible that this was an early (1963) dial for a 105012 as the early ones did not have T marks, but perhaps these were added as part of some Import Regulation?

Not really possible I think as this dial does not have any step I can see.

Perhaps a service dial, relumed and T's added. The more I look at it the more I think it is the same dial as the one in the watch I returned.

Any thoughts?

 

Was the dial originally intended for radium lume , but tritium was added instead hence the "T" printing at a later date?

 

It looks like a luminova dial which has been relumed to look like panita'd tritium and with added T's. Do you have the pic of the back of it? Edit: The font of "proffessional" is different than the luminova dials though...

 

professional on the dial ? crocked T`s ? no step in the dial ? caliber 321 ? sunflower yellow lume? avoid..... kind regards. achim

 

Added Ts were always placed below "Swiss Made" , is that correct ?
Like in the following Ed White 1963:



OP dial close up

 

I'd go with modern service dial, T's added, markers "aged" (not that well). Though the Omega Speedmaster looks more like the modern Pre-Pro version rather than the Pro version. Perhaps T and Professional were added?

 

they could at least buy a service one for 105.012... would looks nicer.

Agree with you...

 

Seems strange to have the expertise to add the T's, but stupidly place them incorrectly !!

 

Don't service dials have a round O and a dropped S ?

 

https://omegaforums.net/threads/the-devil-is-in-the-detail.56866/page-2#post-702627

 

@oddboy @dennisthemenace - might be a 105.012-63 dial - looked through the 105.012 and 145.012 dials and the 'E' in OMEGA on most of the T'd dial I saw have the left side lined up with inside of the left foot of the omega symbol above it (see below). The "dial in question"s E is a bit to the left and looks the same as the 105.012-63 non-T'd dial. Credit to @Spacefruit 's site for some of the pictures. Hard to tell if the dial has a step though, that might be the bigger issue.

Dial in Question


105.012-63 Dial


105.012-65 Dial for Comparison


As to why the T's were added... no clue.

 

No step on OP dial, that I can see...

 

Maybe I'm missing something but to me it looks like a service dial that's been aged to look old with Ts added.

 

I am fairly sure that is it.

I originally bought a 145.022-69 from Europe with was either this dial or one that looked very similar.

The thing that I don't understand is taking the time and skill to colour the lume, and then print well defined perfectly matching T's.

But crooked.

 

I'd like to see it in the flesh with a loupe.

It's a strange one though. Is it because one can have several attempts at a relume, removing any mistakes before the lume dries, where-as it's a one shot deal with adding printed T's?
Are the T's a transfer, designed for a dial with a different radius Hence the angle?
Is it a genuine early dial and we just can't see a small step? I still don't think so, but the fact we're having the discussion suggests that the prices of early Speedmaster parts now means we must scrutinise in much more detail than even a year or two ago to rule out any funny business.

 

The G's in Omega look different, as do the R's in Speedmaster.

 

....

Step 3.). Profit.

 

Someone...Somewhere... is thanking us for this tutorial....sadly

 

This is the sad truth...all the expertise shared here could ultimately allow a shady workshop to create more and more faithful "reproductions".

Each time I see something like this I think that my days of fuzzy or "newb" eBay photo searching for that steal becomes more and more dangerous....

 

This is so true, and always a disturbing trend in a hobby.

When I first started collecting Rolexes in the 1980's, people on the Rolex forums, like here, just enjoyed discussing the finer points of their watch models, their deals and purchases, etc. When Subs and Daytonas started going through the roof price-wise, the fakers came out, and most of the posts were dominated by discussing the issues of fakes vs. the genuine item. This kind of detective work can be fun for some, but generally, when the fakes get good, frustration and doubt soon follows, and that care-free collecting diversion fun we love wilts a bit.

With the rise in price and interest in high-quality Speedmasters, this issue of fakes will come to dominate more and more of the forum bandwidth, for certain. And it is indeed sad.