The Curious Case of Controversial Constellation Crowns

TNTwatch · Mar 13, 2017

ConElPueblo
@TNTwatch - for us to keep on discussing this, I'll need you to understand that I am not trying to prove a specific point here. I don't care what is uncovered, just that some more data gets laid out. I have no bone in this discussion. Honestly. If

I never said that I considered the aforementioned crown a proper Seamaster crown - Desmond did in his article. I am really struggling here - why do you keep on talking about this?

I did not keep on talking about it. I only answered because you kept on asking questions.

Okay, since you ask for a yes/no answer: No, I don't consider that proof. Omega advertising from that era is riddled with errors of all sorts - go ask the Speedmaster guys! There are numerous examples of this.

Just because Speedmaster ads contained errors doesn't mean all the other ads are wrong. Better to point out the specific errors than conflate it all together.

I do not consider any sort of marketing material - be it produced by Omega themselves (to the extent that they ever did this - I don't know if they did, anyone?) or a second party - to be "proof". It's a pretty good indication of something, but I do not consider it proof.

It's natural that we don't all have the same opinion, but as a "proof of not US market exclusive", I'll stick with my opinion that it definitely is.

I think that it is very telling that you've had numerous 14XXX' bought in Europe with the scalloped crown and the adverts are also good indicators of the use. I am certainly leaning towards it being a globally used item.

I think that you've already seen a lot of real life examples proving those adverts were not errors. 😀

TNTwatch · Mar 13, 2017

Peemacgee
I'll bow to your greater knowledge of photography
But that C-case ad is a render
The shadows aren't correct
(Or at least the second hand was replaced with a shorter one after the photo was taken😉)

Not sure what you mean by render, but I'll stick with photograph and the shadows are correct for what can be seen on the dial resulted from a point light source (It can be seen that there are more than one light source).

There's another image of the same watch, even though it looks less natural, but it was due to printing and still is a photograph (that,s been "shopped" a bit)😀

mondodec · Mar 13, 2017

I don't think we will ever know exactly. As suggested, there is a fair amount of anecdotal evidence that some, but not all by a long shot, Constellations of the early 60s in the US had both clover leaf and thin, knurled crowns as well as decagonal crowns. But, Omega parts manuals of the time, or at least the international ones I have seen, and those that were sent to Australia designate the decagonal crown. The thinner 2mm pipe sized decagonal crowns on the 143xxxs and 149xxs were not easy to wind, and there were probably complaints about them then, as now, particularly from those with pudgy fingers.

So I would continue to argue that 4204 (if I recall the old numbering system) decagonals were part of the original design story, but human nature being what it is dictates that there will always someone who wants to dick around with perfection 😀

The crown shown in the above C-Shape ad definitely does not appear as a designated part for the C Shape, not was it ever part of the Gerald Genta's design story, and yet we see, for reasons of artistic licence or perhaps even sheer bloody-mindedness such a archaic crown being plonked on a wonderful expression of post-modernism. It sticks out as badly as would a great big zit on the nose of Elle MacPherson.

Carol Didisheim, the designer of the Manhattan, during a long conversation I had with her said that most graphics for national publication in various markets were produced at Omega headquarters. That is not to say that national agencies did not have their own promotions and produced graphics locally for models they were pushing.

I don't think it's important what crown came with the watch originally because one will never know through what process of human intervention it got there. The important point in my mind is what crowns are designated in official Swiss parts manuals of the time, which, incidentally, seem to be consistent in supporting the original design story of the model.

gatorcpa · Mar 13, 2017

mondodec
I don't think it's important what crown came with the watch originally because one will never know through what process of human intervention it got there.

My sentiments exactly. This is the main point of the whole thread. There are a lot of things we will never know, so why beat ourselves up over it?

Thank you Desmond.
gatorcpa

smorrisonmd · Mar 13, 2017

I'm dizzy just reading this.

mondodec · Mar 13, 2017

Yes, I gave up on self-flagellation a long time ago!

Nice to hear from you Gator.

Cheers

Desmond

gatorcpa
My sentiments exactly. This is the main point of the whole thread. There are a lot of things we will never know, so why beat ourselves up over it?

Thank you Desmond.
gatorcpa

ConElPueblo · Mar 14, 2017

mondodec
probably complaints about them then, as now, particularly from those with pudgy fingers.

I resent that! 😬

mondodec
I don't think it's important what crown came with the watch originally because one will never know through what process of human intervention it got there. The important point in my mind is what crowns are designated in official Swiss parts manuals of the time, which, incidentally, seem to be consistent in supporting the original design story of the model.

Seeing how the vintage Constellations keep on getting more and more sought after and continue to inspire current designs, I do think that research is still relevant. I am surprised to -frequently- see a lot of questionable "facts" getting bandied around when discussing these references and if I can help digging out a bit more information to add to the brain trust, I'd be delighted.

I got up from bed an hour or so ago after 7.5 hours of solid sleep, so you'll be happy be hear that the subject isn't keeping me awake at night 😁

dialstatic · Mar 14, 2017

I know almost nothing about Connies but wanted to Congratulate you on the thread title of the year.

mondodec · Mar 14, 2017

Yes, you don't get much more alliteration than that 😀

dialstatic
I know almost nothing about Connies but wanted to Congratulations you on the thread title of the year.

ConElPueblo · Mar 14, 2017

dialstatic
I know almost nothing about Connies but wanted to Congratulate you on the thread title of the year.

mondodec
Yes, you don't get much more alliteration than that 😀

Thank you, thank you. It did take a few minutes coming up with "Controversial" which I'll admit may be a stretch 😁

cristos71 · Mar 14, 2017

I've seen 14381's with what were IMHO original crowns of both types, so in my mind both the scalloped crown and the decagonal were meant for the 14xxx ref's.

The slim decagonal's that I've had on 14381's were well aged with wear to the plating and the old logo, which makes me think these were the original fitted crowns. I say that after comparing the wear to other late 1950's/early 1960's dress watch crowns which I feel are original and period correct.

I don't know where these 3 watches were originally sold but the two lowest I bought from family of the original owners here in Europe. All are long gone from my collection now. ( YG dome now resides with @dougiedude )

Kja · Mar 14, 2017

I wonder if the world is ready to take on the bear in the room...

There is no such thing as a old/new logo..
As many old crowns have happy feet..
Don't believe? I have seen about three/four different omega symbols from just the fifties..
Plus all fifties boxes have happy feet? I think a lot of these "givens" on the forum have exceptions. I don't buy into the conspiracy there was a lot of groups/companies changing crowns like a crown mafia to hide omega's perfect designs.. I find it more likely omega used what they felt looked the best in "that" watch.
Remember, these were very expensive, and they didn't make a lot like today.

silver · Mar 14, 2017

hello my first post here

just my 14381 with a scalloped crowns

ConElPueblo · Mar 14, 2017

silver
hello my first post here

just my 14381 with a scalloped crowns

Hello and welcome. Your Constellation looks great - love the rose gold dial furniture 😀

mondodec
there will always someone who wants to dick around with perfection 😀

But who? If this was the work of individuals who changed it during a service or at another time, how come there are so many of it? And one on only a few references? The generic crowns that scar a lot of vintage Constellations now are completely different and used across a number of references. Also, it does appear in Omega adverising from that period.

GregH · Mar 14, 2017

silver
hello my first post here

just my 14381 with a scalloped crowns

Welcome @silver and thanks for sharing your Connie.
You may also want to take a look at and post on this thread:
https://omegaforums.net/threads/vintage-constellations-show-and-tell.19186/
Choose yourself an avatar and enjoy.

ahsposo · Mar 14, 2017

ConElPueblo
But who? If this was the work of individuals who changed it during a service or at another time, how come there are so many of it? And one on only a few references? The generic crowns that scar a lot of vintage Constellations now are completely different and used across a number of references. Also, it does appear in Omega adverising from that period.

The Shadow Knows!

silver · Mar 14, 2017

GregH
Welcome @silver and thanks for sharing your Connie.
You may also want to take a look at and post on this thread:
https://omegaforums.net/threads/vintage-constellations-show-and-tell.19186/
Choose yourself an avatar and enjoy.

thank you greg, i will take a look and choose an avatar too !

BenBagbag · May 30, 2018

So I've been using this thread as a constant reference for a 14393 I just bought that had an incorrect and unsightly crown. Believe it or not, I've come in contact with three different 12 sided scalloped crowns (of course there may be more), and I think only one of them is correct for the 14.XXX watches. @ConElPueblo's work has been extremely helpful in navigating the process and I am really grateful to him for his research efforts.

The most noticeably incorrect of the scallops is from the 36mm manual wind watches. For reference, here is my 2639 with a scalloped crown that measures in at 5.33-5.5mm depending on how you catch the knurls (which makes a difference for measurement). It is also tall but I have not measured. Given that the tubes and tap size may not even line up with the 14XXX, you may not even be able to install it. Pictures:

The next (IMO incorrect) crown would be the scalloped crown more commonly seen on the 166.020 seamaster deville. Noticeably it has a more pronounced distinction between the middle part to the scallops (if that makes sense). It is only 4.85mm wide and a bit taller than the correct scalloped crown that the difference can be seen:

Finally, our correct crown, the thin profile and scalloped crown. I've found in my search that depending on where the calipers catch it can be between 5.22-5.3mm. It is flatter than the other 2 and can be seen in a comparison from @ConElPueblo's 3 watches as examples. I'm also showing a side by side with the 2639.

@ahsposo's 14XXX which he posted in this thread:

a profile shot from another watch:

The group shot from @ConElPueblo's post elsewhere:

and a comparison with the 2639:

Just trying to add to the body of research... I hope it's okay that I borrowed a lot of different pictures from here and the internet for my shots.

Here is my new-to-me 14393. It came with an unsightly crown. It had to go. I was able to source a correct replacement scalloped crown (miraculously) and in a rather short period of time (luckily). I also had a new OEM crystal fitted:

Again, much of this has been worked out by @ConElPueblo but I figured I could at least add the measurements and some closer pictures of incorrect ones. Of course this all assumes that you believe the scalloped crown could be original to the 14XXX series.

Additional thanks to @cristos71 and @No Mercy!

Ben

Noddyman · May 30, 2018

Good work and well done seeking out a scalloped crown.
It’s a good feeling when a watch finally comes together. Railtrack looks great BTW!

cristos71 · Apr 12, 2023

So I've just picked up some crowns and amongst them are these scallop crowns.

As some of the other crowns are the thin decagonal Constellation 4204's I was hopeful that these may be the scallop 4205's and also correct for the 143** series of Constellation references....but now I'm not so sure as after reading through this and a couple of other threads think they are too small.

Mine measure around 4.5mm diameter and 2.65 max height compared to the dimensions I find for the 4205 of 4.85mm diameter and 2,95mm height.

Does anybody have an idea what they are for?

The Curious Case of Controversial Constellation Crowns

TNTwatch

TNTwatch

mondodec

gatorcpa

smorrisonmd

mondodec

ConElPueblo

dialstatic

mondodec

ConElPueblo

cristos71

Kja

silver

ConElPueblo

GregH

ahsposo

silver

BenBagbag

Noddyman

cristos71

Similar threads

The Latest Constellation Pie Pan in My Collection (Ref. 168.0065)

The Curious Case of the Corroborated Constellation Crown

The Curious Case of the Alaska Project Sales History

Constellation Crowns Decagonal / 10-Sided Steel & Gold (Vintage; Flat Feet Logo)

Pic Heavy: The curious story of a “reversed” Tunisian minaret clock.

The ULTIMATE Constellation thread