Actually, I got it from a local watchmaker for posting and selling several of his vintage watches for him. It ran, but WAY too quickly. I couldn't ask him to "improve" his gift, could I? It's off to an old and trusted friend for a tune-up now...

 

Wow! Very nice.

 

It's been identified by Superior Watch as a 26.5.3 from 1940. Dunno anything else about it. The case is different than other early Omega 6-eaters I've seen...

 

I´m sceptical

 

It´s now you miss Dennis the most. He would have butchered a newcomer showing the kind of crap Don Madson does

 

I would find out what the watch actually is before investing any further in it. Do you have a picture inside the watch? As you pointed out the case is very different from what is commonly seen, so it would be good to see if there are any markings inside. IMO, it is also a redial.

 

As I said, marturx, I'm ignorant. Just looking for information, not vilification. I don't mind being butchered for good reason, but remarks like yours make me wonder why I'm here!

 

Here's a shot of the inside...

 

It´s a big difference in being ignorant and wreckless and truly wanting to learn and to contribute to the forum. Posting that single pic of a very doubtful "Omega", I don´t get it, what is it you want to achieve?

 

I'm ignorant, not "wreckless"...no such word. My posts about my Speedmaster elicited solid information, with leads where to find more solid information. I'm grateful. I will NEVER be a collector of the level that you obviously are, or that those who were helpful are. I don't mind being told that I'm showing crap, but everyone else at least showed a level of politeness. Sorry if I offended your horological sensibilities. I'll check out now...

 

Well, that sure is a great loss to the community in that case

 

Don Madsen,

Click on marturx avatar to open up his previous posts. You may make your own judgements about the stuff he posts on the MB. Then you might want to retaliate, and give him your thoughts on the crap (his words) that he posts! He's probably a decent sort, but his hiding behind a fake name, and taking advantage of his anonymity, he can't resist taking a shot at a recent arrival! Sorry for his rude reception, but consider the source!

 

I guess he's just decided that I'm a good target. That's fine. I find his phonetic spelling style kinda refreshing...

 

Forgetting about politeness and how to at least welcome newcomers trying to learn is for sure a great loss to this community.

I personnaly saw nothing wrong in Don's question. Taking the time to politely explain why a watch is not interesting for serious collectors (redone dial, non original case...) seems a minimum to me.
I also think that simply ignoring the ones who react violently when they don't like the answer is the right attitude but this is a situation where I can understand that some people loose patience.

Here however, you seem not to give the OP a chance to understand what is not original in his watch. Using immediately words like 'crap' 'wreckless' and doubting of his willingness to contribute to the forum is clearly an aggression for which I saw no reason (maybe I missed some previous posts?). I found Joe K's answer much more constructive and in line with what I liked when joining this forum. Too bad it seems no more to be the norm here.

I usually don't interfere with this kind of thread but I I'm seriously getting bored with this attitude. I liked Dennis' earlier posts, certainly not his last production. If this contempt for the ones who don't know is to be the new line for OF, I'll probably loose all my interest in it.
But eventually, who really cares?

 

I knew since before that @Canuck is no fan of mine (I really don't know why actually, I have never done him any harm) so I'm not at all surprised by his interference. I guess you cannot be liked by everybody

@Tire-comedon I do respect, both his knowledge and his attitude and his great contribution to the forum, so I do take seriously what he says.

I guess my frustration over where this forum is heading, took the better out of me. Therefore I want to apologise to @Don Madson for being rude, and to the whole of the community for my behaviour.

Seriously

 

Thank you. As I said...I'm ignorant in many ways, FINE watches being one. Now, maybe I can enlist your expertise? I posted an "inside" shot of the cobbled-together 26.5.3. Can I get your opinion? I took the shot with a cellphone just before sending it out, so I can't get a better picture of the case back, but will do so when it returns. Your thoughts?
Thanks
Don

 

I already told you my opinion. It won't change, despite me doing a poodle regarding my way of expressing it

 

Is the movement at least legitimate?

 

Well, that's exactly the honorable attitude which made me join this forum. A lot of credit and thanks to you also to reconsider your post, it's always a difficult exercise.

Being kind doesn't mean hiding the truth. This particular watch has a redone dial, as already said, and a non Omega case. The minute hand is too short to be original also in my opinion. All this make it a parts donnor, not worth a lot, for collectors like Martrux or me.

 

Yes, it is a 26.5 made by Omega.