Thoughts on this Omega Constellation 168.0010

[MJR]

I have been looking for a nice 1960s constellation for a while and noticed this one for sale. It is a 168.0010 with Cal 564. The watch looks to be in excellent condition and does not look to be polished. The dial looks mint which always worries me a little that it has been refinished. The seller tells me it is a factory finish but wanted to get a consensus here. Everything looks OK comparing other examples but worried I have missed something.

Anyone see any red flags on this watch on dial, case or wrong parts ?

 

[Ginkgo_Turtle]

I'm still trying to perfect the "MOY" test.
It could be only camera angle here:


Depending on price, i would buy if i really liked, but i'm no collector.

 

[Peemacgee]

The case looks nice but no 168.010 came with straight Ns in constellation, or facetless date surround.

The font isn't great either and there are no Ts for the lume - and the indices look painted not onyx - so its either a fake dial or I wonder if this is a later service dial?

Do you have any rear/internal pics?

what is the asking price?

Edit
the applied 'OMEGA' also has a pointy A

 

[redpcar]

Too bold. Redial or fake.

 

[MJR]

Peemacgee

The case looks nice but no 168.010 came with straight Ns in constellation, or facetless date surround.

The font isn't great either and there are no Ts for the lume - and the indices look painted not onyx - so its either a fake dial or I wonder if this is a later service dial?

Do you have any rear/internal pics?

what is the asking price?

Edit
the applied 'OMEGA' also has a pointy A

Here is an internal shot plus a different angle.

The lume also worried me that it is a green colour which I had seen on earlt 70s speedmasters and the T was also one of my own concerns.

Asking price is 1300 EURO, which is relatively strong but compared to UK dealer prices is inline with what I would have to pay from a UK dealer.

 

[Peemacgee]

I've a feeling that this watch has had a 'job' done on it - possibly by Omega.
It definitely didn't leave the factory looking like this.

The crown is an incorrect replacement - and stands out like a sore thumb.
The rotor has been replaced
the dial is (at best) a replacement. (I worry about that pointy A)
- However, if genuine, the index inserts appear to have some depth to them so could be later onyx inserts, not painted
The case looks to have had a light polish
You can see the signs of moisture intrusion on the movement (the verdigris) hence the dial swap I would suggest.

You mention 168.0010 - is that what the inner case back says? (or does it say 168.010 as it should)
What does it say on the hangtag?

In any event, €1300 is too much for a put-together watch - even if it was done by Omega.
Much as I love this reference, you should still be able to get a really nice original version for this kind of money.

 

[MtV]

Peemacgee

I've a feeling that this watch has had a 'job' done on it - possibly by Omega.
It definitely didn't leave the factory looking like this.

I was going to say exactly that, but the (visual) state of the movement gave me pause. Would it look like that if it had just returned from an Omega service?

Either way, not original and I fully agree 1300€ is definitely too much.

 

[Peemacgee]

MtV

I was going to say exactly that, but the (visual) state of the movement gave me pause. Would it look like that if it had just returned from an Omega service?

Either way, not original and I fully agree 1300€ is definitely too much.

Totally agree - I don’t know any decent watchmaker that would return a watch after service with a movt looking like this.

Perhaps dials could be ordered from Omega?
It’s definitely not a contemporaneous dial.

 

[Archer]

Peemacgee

Totally agree - I don’t know any decent watchmaker that would return a watch after service with a movt looking like this.

Perhaps dials could be ordered from Omega?
It’s definitely not a contemporaneous dial.

I don't see any verdigris there - just the plating worn off the bridges, and a slightly off white balance/lighting. This is not damage that Omega would replace the bridges for, so this meets Omega standards.



Yes, replacement rotor, but that's not unusual - there's smearing on the rotor, but that could be from whoever removed the case back.

The dial appears exactly as the current service dial looks, so I don't believe it's fake or a redial.

 

[Peemacgee]

Archer

The dial appears exactly as the current service dial looks, so I don't believe it's fake or a redial.

I did wonder if, by the colour, the lume could be SL.
Do you happen to know if the inserts are onyx (does it specify in the replacement dial spec?)

 

[Archer]

Peemacgee

I did wonder if, by the colour, the lume could be SL.
Do you happen to know if the inserts are onyx (does it specify in the replacement dial spec?)

Yes, it would certainly be luminova. No details are given on the inserts.

 

[MJR]

Peemacgee

I've a feeling that this watch has had a 'job' done on it - possibly by Omega.
It definitely didn't leave the factory looking like this.

The crown is an incorrect replacement - and stands out like a sore thumb.
The rotor has been replaced
the dial is (at best) a replacement. (I worry about that pointy A)
- However, if genuine, the index inserts appear to have some depth to them so could be later onyx inserts, not painted
The case looks to have had a light polish
You can see the signs of moisture intrusion on the movement (the verdigris) hence the dial swap I would suggest.

You mention 168.0010 - is that what the inner case back says? (or does it say 168.010 as it should)
What does it say on the hangtag?

In any event, €1300 is too much for a put-together watch - even if it was done by Omega.
Much as I love this reference, you should still be able to get a really nice original version for this kind of money.

Thank you so much for the guidance really helpful, the inner case back does seem to say 168 0010 and has an observatory as expected on the back. Are there service case backs with a differrnt number ?

 

[MJR]

Archer

I don't see any verdigris there - just the plating worn off the bridges, and a slightly off white balance/lighting. This is not damage that Omega would replace the bridges for, so this meets Omega standards.



Yes, replacement rotor, but that's not unusual - there's smearing on the rotor, but that could be from whoever removed the case back.

The dial appears exactly as the current service dial looks, so I don't believe it's fake or a redial.

Archer thank you so much for your guidance here, never crossed my mind there were service dials for these, and explains why it looked so good for a 50+ year old watch and explains the lume colour.

 

[MJR]

Thank you all for your input on this really appreciate the sharing of the knowledge and insight from this community.

Saved me a lot of regret, so thank you all.

 

[Peemacgee]

MJR

Thank you so much for the guidance really helpful, the inner case back does seem to say 168 0010 and has an observatory as expected on the back. Are there service case backs with a differrnt number ?

My guess is that this is also a service case with the 168.0010 designation.

@Archer ?

 

[Archer]

Peemacgee

My guess is that this is also a service case with the 168.0010 designation.

@Archer ?

Full cases and case backs are both available, and would be marked with the extra 0, so it could be either.