I think the listing has been updated for accuracy, perhaps the seller has read this thread or been contacted by an expert. For example, I think it originally seemed to claim that the sweep hand, bezel, and bracelet are original.
Is it common to see Omega do that replacement? Or more of a red flag?
I honestly don't know the answer to that, but no 861 came with the metal brake and eighteen jewels originally.
Incidentally, having looked at the movement pic a bit closer it appears that the stem bolt for the hammer is missing.
I honestly don't know the answer to that, but no 861 came with the metal brake and eighteen jewels originally.
Incidentally, having looked at the movement pic a bit closer it appears that the stem bolt for the hammer is missing.
I'm not sure I would have said "must". During transition periods like 68-70, a lot of things were possible. It's more likely to have been fitted with a 1039, but the abstract does say it had an 1171. Although the one shown is clearly the present service version, not a vintage one
Many things are off in this watch for its production date.
Stem bolt - IIRC that means the owner won’t be able to stop the chrono at desired position. Only engage and disengage?
I do agree that there are many things in this watch that seem to have been done to it post manufacture, and not necessarily correctly. As Omega states the extract only shows what's in their records and in no way reflects the current state of the watch.
The extract of the archives could be wrong. It's not the first time.
the earliest dated extract for a 145.022-69
...not on any extract.
I honestly don't know the answer to that, but no 861 came with the metal brake and eighteen jewels originally.
Incidentally, having looked at the movement pic a bit closer it appears that the stem bolt for the hammer is missing.
Correct. The top pusher will reset to zero instead of pausing the chrono.
The listing has been updated on this as well. It does start and stop correctly.
