Ultraman Fun or Blasphemy?

Posts
567
Likes
1,810
...if you ever have the chance to see the Omega archive, then you will know that its far away from a consumer con.
 
Posts
4,113
Likes
16,306
...if you ever have the chance to see the Omega archive, then you will know that its far away from a consumer con.

+1 ! I've had a chance to see and research a bit. Impressive.
 
Posts
151
Likes
272
Here you go,
bought a nice 145.012-67 within the serial range, however the chronohand lume dropped. So decided to have some fun with it.

Edited:
 
Posts
4,113
Likes
16,306
This certainly looks good with some distance @Horologyhusky, a close-up allows to see a too short chrono hand 😀
 
Posts
494
Likes
980
I like the orange splash of color. It's what got me into the 70s Heuer Chronos years ago. The orange accents were prominently used in many models and I really love it.

As for the mod. I don't see any problem with it. It's all about enjoying your watches. As long it doesn't get marketed at some point as an original, which I'm sure it won't, all cool.

For example I swapped the crystal on my Rolex 1680 maxi dial for the non cyclops super domed version which is originally for 5513 models. I just appreciate the look and enjoy it more...

 
Posts
2,105
Likes
23,815
kov kov


For sure, the difference is minimal 👍
The red just adds a touch of sportiness to it, and I like it!
 
Posts
494
Likes
980
That one is cool and you better stay with the white spear hand on that one ;-)
 
Posts
304
Likes
596
While we have a number of experts in the room I'd like to see if anyone can shed any light on my 145.012-67's chrono hand. It would appear to be the correct length but is obviously not factory correct being a late October 1968 production. Watch was purchased from son of original owner who said it wasn't service and by the goopy gasket I'm inclined to believe him. In addition the other hands appear to match the lume of the rest of the dial perfectly, leading one to question why if serviced would only the Chrono hand have been replaced? Some time ago a fellow OF'er mentioned that it could be a faded orange hand? Does anyone have any leads to help clarify?

 
Posts
676
Likes
1,053
While we have a number of experts in the room I'd like to see if anyone can shed any light on my 145.012-67's chrono hand. It would appear to be the correct length but is obviously not factory correct being a late October 1968 production. Watch was purchased from son of original owner who said it wasn't service and by the goopy gasket I'm inclined to believe him. In addition the other hands appear to match the lume of the rest of the dial perfectly, leading one to question why if serviced would only the Chrono hand have been replaced? Some time ago a fellow OF'er mentioned that it could be a faded orange hand? Does anyone have any leads to help clarify?

Seems way too white to be a faded orange hand
 
Posts
304
Likes
596
Didn't omega use a similar chrono hand on the racing speedie? If I recall correctly they were produced in '68?
 
Posts
4,113
Likes
16,306
Ultraman's hand has some unique properties described in the MWO 2.0 book 😉

@Don Bocadillo I see this to be a quite creative service replacement. But for sure I might be wrong 😁
 
Posts
162
Likes
94
The Mod sounds like a cool idea. If I had a 145.022 as well as 145.012 I'd be inclined to go poor mans racing dial just for fun.
 
Posts
331
Likes
1,932
It cannot leave its cousin...
What a nice pair of Omegas you have 😀 I have a similar Speedy but the Seamaster I envy you 😁