Forums Latest Members
  1. MKelley Mar 11, 2013

    Posts
    1,159
    Likes
    109
    Saw this on Ebay:

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=281075410417Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

    Inside case back has 2 numbers, 145.022 & 345.022. Omega's serial number database, of course validates 145.022 as a Speedmaster. The number 345.022 returns the result as Speedmaster Replica.

    What am I missing or should know?
     
    Alderd likes this.
  2. ulackfocus Mar 11, 2013

    Posts
    25,983
    Likes
    26,972
    The 3 usually designates it's a mens model that came with a bracelet.
     
  3. MKelley Mar 11, 2013

    Posts
    1,159
    Likes
    109
    Thanks Dennis, I thought so. But when I entered 345.022 into the database, it return the result, Speedmaster Replica. ::confused2::

    Maybe a better question: Why are there 2 sets of numbers on the inside of the case back?
     
  4. ulackfocus Mar 11, 2013

    Posts
    25,983
    Likes
    26,972
    The first is usually the standard reference number, the second is like a specialty number. The Seamaster Sparkle caliber 751 has a top number of 166.032 (which is the base reference for the caliber 750 non-chronometer model), then since it's the chronometer version it's secondary number is 168.023.
     
  5. MKelley Mar 11, 2013

    Posts
    1,159
    Likes
    109
    Thanks again Dennis. Always learning is a good thing;)
     
  6. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Mar 11, 2013

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789

    Poor choice of words on Bienne's part. They mean it is a homage piece to the original Speedmaster, not that it is fake. Perhaps it is a language nuance thing that the copy writer did not understand in translation.
     
  7. MKelley Mar 11, 2013

    Posts
    1,159
    Likes
    109
    Thanks Steve. Got it! By all the experience/knowledge, of Omegas and vintage watches around here, I'm still a newb. Yeah, the word "Replica" on Omega's database made no sense to me. I knew there just had to be a reasonable explanation out there. :thumbsup: