Nice write up. I think there is a typo at the end of para 4, I think you meant to say (and indeed do so later) that Omega had no suitable bracelet for the FOIS at launch rather than no suitable strap.
The comment about facets is highly contentious has been discussed on here at length. If you are basing your conclusion on that video that is doing the rounds, it is a little ambiguous as it refers mainly to the 2998. I personally believe that at least some straight lugs did come with a lug facet. Find me a 105.003-65 without a facet for instance, they are even discernible in publicity shots but it seems certain the -64 model (as per the EW re-release) did not. Whatever, it seems probably no straight lug ever had a facet as large as that on the FOIS.
Hi,
Thanks for the typo, will edit it.
No, I never base my conclusion on videos tbh. I checked with different people at Omega's HQ and Museum. They all repeatedly indicated a watch from the first three gens never left the manufacture with facets. It was only done later on during service (also at HQ, from what I understood).
Hi,
They all repeatedly indicated a watch from the first three gens never left the manufacture with facets. It was only done later on during service (also at HQ, from what I understood).
Interesting. I thought the facets on CK2915 60th reissue was meant to replicate the original 1957 CK2915 facets (from factory)?
Why did Omega decide not to make all the sub-dial hands the same as they were in the original reference?
As I say, I have my doubts that they are 100% right on this. The 105.003-65 for instance was made by a different (as yet unidentified) case maker to the rest of the straight lugs and I've never seen one with no facet a la -64. How come, for instance, most -64s seen have no facet but most -65s do? It just doesn't make sense that they started off the same.
