Ah, I think I get what you mean now! You're saying that the original c-case seconds hands have no central tube (is it called a collet?) projecting above the flat, round central part of the hand?

 

Most don't, some have but it could just be rust/patina making it appear like they do, or a service/replacement/wrong hand

Since these hands come from an Omega trove it doesn't bother me much though

I have a really unique watch that was serviced by a very reputable place in UK, the seller had a 550 pound receipt, I suspected that one received replacement hands during the service, I know see from the central tube that they indeed probably are replacement hands

 

It's interesting what we do or do not perceive as "original" or "genuine". I guess that what often happens is that the manufacturer updates a genuine replacement part for a vintage watch, either to improve it or because of a change in the manufacturing processes. I suppose in that case you could regard the watch as entirely authentic even if it's not identical to what it would have been like when first sold.

 

Indeed it's a very interesting subject, minimally the serial, caseback and the dial should match, the rest is fixable

So far for C-Case's, only the crystals are easy to fix, finding right crowns, hands are quite challenging

Generic Omega replacement crowns don't bother me, around 20% of my watches have wrong crowns

Having wrong hands don't bother me either, as long as they are Omega hands

So I guess for me, being genuine Omega is enough, a watch doesn't have to be all factory original, the replacements become part of its life/story

 

Thanks!!

 

Just acquired my first ever Omega bracelet - and am very pleased with it.


Thanks to @kaplan

 

Well after much thought, I think I still want a grey dial .027, forget the speedy reduced

 

Well after much thought, I think I still want a grey dial .027, forget the speedy reduced

 

To my mind they are for very different occasions, I have a 40mm speedmaster date, which is a companion to my c-cases and also sits in the regular rotation.

Both can be worn casually I feel, however if I want to wear the speedy at something formal I swap it to a leather strap, but even then its really not the same as a C-case.

I might argue look getting both eventually

 

I agree on the versatility of C-shape. They can be dressed up or be very casual indeed. Today a more casual look with a Welsbro strap .

 

what's this bracelet reference and link number? thanks!

 

1068 / 620 BoR

 

did it cost an arm and a leg?

 

I’ll pm you

 

Don’t see many c-cases on BoRs, was it an after-purchase option from Omega?

 

I’m afraid I’ve no idea. As you’ll have appreciated, I’ve just bought the bracelet.

 

not actually sure, but you are right, BoR's are usually 18mm, and C-cases have 19mm, so yeah, it's pretty uncommon i guess

 

Looks great in any case! BoR are iconic Omega.

 

Random observation / query. I keep reading articles about the c-case that talk about how this “larger size” style fitted with the aesthetics of the time, etc. And yet, the standard c-case constellation is not a large-wearing watch, even for the 1960s. Although it’s a fairly standard 35mm, if anything it looks smaller because the dial is smaller than on (say) a 35mm round-case constellation of the same period.

This suits me very well as a skinny-wristed person, but I’m puzzled why it’s sometimes referred to as if it’s a large watch.

 

As you can see, I’m also skinny-wristed and I find both the c-case and the 166/165.041 very comfortable despite the design having the appearance, or actually being*, a larger watch.

* I could, of course, measure the wretched things if I could be bothered with it this afternoon