Hi all! I'm new to the forum and fairly new to collecting Omega watches, so thanks in advance for the help! I found a beautiful watch on a popular bidding website, and I'm wondering if it looks authentic and worth perusing. I read a bunch of articles about telling real from fake watches, but I would still love to have some extra opinions.For your consideration is a vintage Constellation Ref 168.005 with a caliber 564. The watch looks pretty good to me, but there is one thing that's making me nervous. The printed minute marker below the 12 o'clock gold marker is a little off center. How does this look overall to you? do you think it is authentic?
welcome to the forum not a fake - all the tell tale signs are there for a correct case although from the pics I think the lugs have been 'polished sharp' -the top lugs look a little thin and the top facets appear to be missing I don't think the 12 minute mark is off centre it aligns with the centre of the marker but the lighting makes it look off The font on the dial, to all intents and purposes looks correct but is quite thick and doesn't pass the MOY test Someone has definitely been messing with the star I'm not calling a re-dial, but for this era, I would expect the font to quite fine and the upper text more obviously serif'd - but there may be different dial makers, so I'm hoping those more versed in variations in pie-pans will chip in hope that helps for now - lets see what others say
As @Peemacgee says, something looks off with the dial. The text looks a bit thick, try to have a look at the "Vintage Constellations Show and Tell" thread on here and compare for yourself. It might be a service dial? Regarding the case I am in agreement with the above posted - the facets around the bend in lugs shouldn't be of varying width as here, but have the same dimension on the entire length of the lug. It could possibly be a trick of the light, but I wouldn't count on it.
To me the C in Constellation is a bit squashed and the ink is too thick. The word also looks crooked and off-center to me. Should there be an hour marker to the right of the date window as in hoipolloi's example? My $0.01, because I'm not at $0.02 yet.
That small hour marker next to date window is not important. Some have it some don't. The tone of all the hands and logo and all the furnitures of the dial are so uniformed that makes me think they have just been dipped into a pinky gold stuff. PS. That crystal has a logo from China and the font says redial.
[QUOTE="hoipolloi, post: 583772, member PS. That crystal has a logo from China .[/QUOTE] That's a new piece of info to store for future use
Wow! Thanks for all the input! Its sounding more and more like this may not be the dream watch I was hoping to pick up!
That's a new piece of info to store for future use [/QUOTE] For your record. First pic is from Hijak's 168.005.
Personally I would not have known for sure whether that dial is refinished but it certainly looks odd to me, with heavy lines and a sort of watery background. A good example of that fundamental rule of watch purchasing: If In Doubt, Leave It Out. This should not be confused with Taking A Gamble, which is where something looks ok, there are no obvious red flags, and although there is insufficient information to be certain you consider the Balance Of Probability / Affordability / Desirability To Me / Likelihood Of Fake equation to be high enough above the line. Oh, I almost forgot: this equation is frequently distorted by the rogue factor of The More I Want This One To Be Right, The More Likely It Will Be.
I think that in the first picture, the watch is being held at an slight angle which is making the font look distorted. That being said, I'm not loving that Constellation star. Hoi is right about the crystal. That logo looks funny to me. Movement pictures are useless. Unless this watch is very cheap and the potential buyer is a gambler, I'd recommend a pass. gatorcpa