IMO, the pusher action on Excelsior Park movements is in a league of its own.

[Apologies for the non-Omega content. Carry on.]

 

3313 is like butter.

 

321 for me.

Although Valjoux 72/92 is even better.

 

If we have hijcked the post to pusher smoothness , the Lange 1815 Chrono is like "soft" butter !

 

Here's the dial to make it correct.

https://omegaforums.net/threads/speedmaster-dial-for-105-012-65-to-145-012-68.75674/

 

I have a 145.012-68 with 26.554 Serial. Mine has a flat chrono hand

 

Thanks, I’ll give that serious consideration.
That’d definitely make it more original but given the condition I am not sure it would necessarily improve the look greatly.

The landed cost to the UK would be around £2,500 GBP/$3,100 USD so it might not be sensible from the POV of adding value either.

 

It’s a verny nice watch! And a rare reference too. I‘d leave the dial as is, except if you could find a very nice AML dial for a good price. At least it is a tritium dial with nice even patina. I would try to source a set of original tritium minute and hour hands though.

BTW, William wrote an article about service dials on his blog that I found useful in the past:

http://speedmaster101.com/blog/calibre-321-service-dials/

Have a nice day,

Max

 

Thanks for pointing that out. Most of those dials have no step so it looks like mine is yet another variation with a step and long indices but no AML. I take your point about the hands and will likely do as you say eventually.

 

If you swap out to a correct AML you can deduct the value of your current dial, maybe make the purchase more palatable? Or would you keep the service dial? Not sure what they are worth....

 

Congrats! I just posted this picture earlier this morning in WRUW, as I happend to be wearing my 145.012-68 today!


And a better shot from awhile ago.

 

Mine, received today!

 

Well the extract came back (redacted below). The serial checks out but there is sadly no clue as to the dial or hands oddity. I had noted that the contemporary Racing dials had printed logos so I was vainly hoping for something unusual. It's running 60s per day slow and needs a clean so off for a bit of love from a specialist this week and I am hopefully going to get more suitable hour & min hands fitted. I think I will leave the dial which I now realise is possibly referred to tantalisingly on p97 of the 2nd Ed of MWO as a rare type C variant (due to the long indices but printed Logo), seen only once and as such uncategorised. Ideally I would prefer an AML dial but don't fancy the cost to swap. Will update with a pic when it is all done.

ILMS was nearly spot on in the date estimate, it suggested Oct '68...

 

I'd say the more obvious conclusion is a service dial. These were logically ordered in small batches, and hence there seems to be a large amount of variance on the 321's. Odd combinations of step/nostep, AML/printed, and long/short indices seem to be the norm for these.

While 861's just got what ever the current production dial was, Omega had to make small orders through the years for 321 dials, they could not stockpile them as the tritium would degrade, hence many small orders and lots of variations.

Not knocking the piece, it's unique and service dials are cool in their own way, I just don't think its an undescribed production dial.

 

Foo I never claimed it was an undescribed production dial, the fitted hands suggest an early service intervention so it was likely fitted then. It would have been nice if it had been something weird but the extract doesn’t support that. I merely passed on the fact that MWO refer to it but don’t define it as either production or service as they haven’t seen enough of them. It is probably as you said earlier, the dial they fitted to 321 movement watches at service in the 1970s when the contemporary watches still had a step ie 70-74. Presumably at that point they wouldn’t have needed many hence the rarity.

 

Excuse the rookie question...AML=attached metal logo?

 

applied metal logo

 

No worries my friend. I went back and re-read that page a few times also. Then realized you where referring to the first sentence or two. It’s an odd statement they made. Due to the vagaries of English and forum intent we both may have slightly misunderstood each other’s intent.

You have a hell of a piece at an amazing price and I’m jealous! Who ever would have thought it was a 321! And a great example at that!

 

You are both wrong : AWESOME metal logo

 

Pah! the AML is overrated! Don't rub it in @eugeneandresson, remember I haven't got one!

Notice you got a pat on the back for your dating tool. Errr so to speak!