Forums Latest Members

The "P" word - Assistance seeked on this Seamaster Chronograph 176.007

  1. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
    Hanging around here for some time I have learned that there are a couple of words not being taken lightly.
    One word high on the no-no list is "Prototype".
    In general they are used by guys who have purchased a franken watch, or other piece of shit with dubious and/or Ukrainian origin in order to excuse some obvious fault or weird part.;)

    Just before Christmas I bought an Omega Seamaster 176.007 from an auction site in Sweden.
    I liked it, but it was a bit of a gamble as it came without any movement shot.
    Well, I am no stranger to a gamble, and the rest of the watch looked very clean and "unmolested".
    I have posted these photos of it earlier:
    IMG_7965.JPG IMG_7966.JPG IMG_7969.JPG

    As those who have researched these will see, it has the original "pointed" minute hand, and also the early dial without applied indexes.

    After some days I received it in the mail, and of course had to open it to check on the movement.
    First relief came when I found that it was ticking away, and all functions checked out.
    Caseback had correct ref (176.007), but the serial number on the rotor (the only place they are marked on the cal 1040) gave me some concern.
    I was expected to find a 8 digit serial corresponding to Omega standards. However mine had a 5 digit number only.

    Researching the issue I found some earlier posts where the rotor was marked with a serial "R" and 5 digits. As far as I have learned this implies a service replacement rotor. However mine had no "R" in front.

    Here is my rotor (sorry for the lousy pic):
    IMG_7980.JPG

    What to do?
    Well, I made the plunge and sent a Customer Support request to Omega (as 5 digit serial numbers are not accepted when ordering an extract).
    Today I got the following answer:

    We thank you for your request of December 29th, 2015 and are pleased to learn that you are a collector of vintage watches.
    Following your message, we understand that you would like to have some more information about a vintage OMEGA watch. Therefore, we send you here attached the product sheet of the timepiece.
    http://www.omegawatches.com/planet-...ache=1&cHash=1b9c6af1d215fe8be3c56b9009545864
    However, we suppose that the movement number of your watch belongs to a prototype and therefore we regret to inform you that no extract of the archive can be ordered.


    Now.... Should I be happy, or should the P word still be kept silent?::confused2::::confused2::::confused2::

    Any advice or confirmation either way is highly valued (as always).
    ::popcorn::
    Cheers!
     
  2. Andy K Dreaming about winning an OFfie one day. Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    1,819
    Likes
    5,884
    Very interesting, thanks for sharing. I have nothing to add other than nice watch and you need a wider strap for your prototype! ;)
     
    Northernman likes this.
  3. STANDY schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collector Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    16,311
    Likes
    44,713
    maximilian g and Northernman like this.
  4. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
    Do not worry... Strap has been changed, and crystal scratches polished.
    The seller even forgot to remove a very nice IWC 16mm SS buckle that was mounted on the strap..... And I was just about going to look for one to fit my ref 2611 IWC Yacht Club. :)
     
  5. peatnick Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    2,484
    Likes
    22,866
    Luck = Preparation + Opportunity :)
     
  6. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
  7. tdn-dk Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    1,717
    Likes
    14,547
    I have just checked mine 176.007 for the serial, and it have a normal Omega number. My guess it is a replacement service Rotor.

    [​IMG]
     
    Frasse and Northernman like this.
  8. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
    I am very uncertain myself, but the ones I have found to be confirmed as replacement rotors have the character "R" in front of a 5 digit number.
    And when Omega uses the "P" word.....
    BTW: My other 176.007 (I have two now) has a number similar to yours.
     
  9. STANDY schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collector Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    16,311
    Likes
    44,713
    Doh, damn iPad screen ::facepalm2::
     
    Northernman likes this.
  10. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
    Resident 176.007 special agent @cvalue13. Any ideas?
    ;)::confused2::
     
  11. Skrotis Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    522
    Likes
    2,345
    I bought the other omega objekt from the seller A 38 mm waffle cal 265 but he forgotten to mention the 7077 bracelet from 1960 on the description.
    The seller is a old antique dealer from my neiberhood and have no clue about modern watches.
    when i picked up the my watch he showed nortermans watch and asked why it was so popular and i must say it was
    Stunning.
     
    Northernman likes this.
  12. dialstatic Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    924
    Likes
    1,772
    I'll open mine tomorrow and see if it's a prototype, too ;-)

    Are you very sure, by the way, that the dial without the applied indices (the matte blue dial with the black hour register) is the earlier variant? I ask, because I have an early example with the sunburst blue & white hour register dial, and when I sent it in to Bienne a couple of years ago, they swapped it for a service dial that looks exactly like yours (minus the twin T's, obviously). I'm currently considering putting back my original, somewhat dinged, dial.
     
  13. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
    According to what I have been able to find it is the earliest version. The fact that most of its predecessors, the relatively rarely seen 176.001, is normally seen with it strengthens this IMO.
    Here is a dealer sheet on the 176.001 kindly provided by member @cvalue13.
    [​IMG]
     
    BrianMcKay and dialstatic like this.
  14. dialstatic Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    924
    Likes
    1,772
    Thanks! Still, I recently came across a blue 176.001 that has the other, sunburst&white dial (which I'm 99% sure wasn't replaced), and as you stated it precedes the 176.007, so I remain somewhat unsure. Is it plausible that the different dials were used in different countries?

    I'm a great fan of the 176.007 by the way: I have two now and am happy to find that there are other enthusiasts here :)
     
    image.jpeg
    Vulffi, Andy K and Northernman like this.
  15. Andy K Dreaming about winning an OFfie one day. Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    1,819
    Likes
    5,884
    OK, I'll invoke the "P Word" again! I believe that the watch depicted on that dealer sheet is a 176.001 prototype. Note the unique chrono minute hand not seen elsewhere and the fact that the dial doesn't say Seamaster. All of the 176.001s I've seen have very similar dials to those of the 176.007. On the blue dials (both matte w/ black subdial and sunburst w white subdial) the text is stacked differently from MOST 176.007s. Seamaster typically comes before Automatic on the 001s, and the other way around is more common on 007s. I've seen exceptions either on both references. The silver dials are generally indistinguishable between the 001 and 007.

    I don't really know which case reference came first, or which dial variants within a given reference were earliest. All of the source material is confusing. Steve Waddington's site has several catalogs from the era that helps narrow it down. The black Mark III and the sunburst blue 007 appear in 1972 catalogs. The sunburst blue Mark III and Speedmaster 125 appear in 1973. The matte blue 007, the 005, and the Mark IV all show up in 1974. The Yachting doesn't show up in catalogs until 1975. The 001 is never shown in these catalogs. All of this proves nothing, but it opens the door to the possibility that the sunburst blue dial actually preceding the matte blue. Or maybe they were all released around the same time.
     
    TNTwatch and Northernman like this.
  16. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
    Here is my other 007. Bl
    Perhaps a better P-word in the case of the 176.001 in question is Pre-Series. Many catalogue and dealer brochures contains early design images where all feature details perhaps did not make it into final production.
    As the catalog page shared by @cvalue13 contains hand writing saying "replaced by 176.007 in 1972" I take it as an indication that 176.001 predates ref 176.007.
     
    Andy K likes this.
  17. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    Nothing wrong with saying prototype if you apply it with honest purpose and sincere belief.

    Besides we can always kick your ass later if we don't like it :whipped::D
     
    Moviken, RawArcher and Northernman like this.
  18. Northernman Lemaniac Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    4,422
    Likes
    18,121
    As it was uttered by Omega, and not me in the first place, I feel somewhat protected. :eek::)
     
  19. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,789
    Indeed :thumbsup:
     
  20. RawArcher Measures thread drift on the Richter Scale Jan 4, 2016

    Posts
    758
    Likes
    1,680
    We sometimes forget there are real uncles too......
    Great watch btw!