- Posts
- 130
- Likes
- 398
maxbliss888
·Happy Friday everyone !
Vintage Omega Constellation 168.005
- Posts
- 34,843
- Likes
- 39,407
dsio
··Ash @ ΩFThat’s definitely not a 168.005, its a lot of combined pieces from different sources
- Posts
- 2,257
- Likes
- 15,695
hejsam
·Is that a solid gold dial with silver indices?
- Posts
- 2,658
- Likes
- 3,115
kaplan
·Whatever it is, it's beautiful
- Posts
- 9,889
- Likes
- 55,980
gbesq
·As dsio said, definitely not a 168.005. It looks like a put together of design elements of different vintage Constellation references, but I have to say that it's pretty well done. I'd like to see photos of the inside of the case back and the movement.
Edited:
- Posts
- 130
- Likes
- 398
maxbliss888
·
cant tell if it’s 168.005 or 188.005…
Edited:
- Posts
- 130
- Likes
- 398
maxbliss888
·I think there are variations and combination for the pie pan dial
- Posts
- 34,843
- Likes
- 39,407
dsio
··Ash @ ΩF
Some very very nice pieces in there mate, great stuff!
- Posts
- 130
- Likes
- 398
maxbliss888
·Some very very nice pieces in there mate, great stuff!
Thanks…
- Posts
- 2,658
- Likes
- 3,115
kaplan
·Send the rose gold C-Case to me please and thank you 😁
- Posts
- 34,843
- Likes
- 39,407
dsio
··Ash @ ΩFBtw my best guess at the first watch:
Early Constellation Deluxe dial and hands off something like an OT2799
Seamaster 14363 case
Late Constellation dogleg 168.005 caseback
Service replacement Constellation crown
Cal 551 movement out of a 168.007 / 14900 or similar
Early Constellation Deluxe dial and hands off something like an OT2799
Seamaster 14363 case
Late Constellation dogleg 168.005 caseback
Service replacement Constellation crown
Cal 551 movement out of a 168.007 / 14900 or similar
- Posts
- 9,889
- Likes
- 55,980
gbesq
·Indeed, you have some very nice pieces there, but the watch in question puzzles me. It's certainly not any dial variation of the 168.005 that I've ever seen (no date window and a caliber 551 under the hood) and I'm not aware of any Constellation reference 188.005. I'd like to hear from the OF vintage Connie experts on this, but I'm voting a put together.
- Posts
- 2,257
- Likes
- 15,695
hejsam
·Btw my best guess at the first watch:
Early Constellation Deluxe dial and hands off something like an OT2799
Seamaster 14363 case
Late Constellation dogleg 168.005 caseback
Service replacement Constellation crown
Cal 551 movement out of a 168.007 / 14900 or similar
Or was it ever made an dial in solid white gold and this is just patina making it look golden?
- Posts
- 4,593
- Likes
- 10,810
janice&fred
·It's a factory prototype snuck out the back door by a technician.
Seriously tho, I like it and see no problem with it. Put togethers can be fun.
Seriously tho, I like it and see no problem with it. Put togethers can be fun.
- Posts
- 34,843
- Likes
- 39,407
dsio
··Ash @ ΩFBut did it ever existed a deluxe dial with silver indices and hands?
Or was it ever made a dial in solid white gold and this is just patina making it look golden?
- Posts
- 2,257
- Likes
- 15,695
hejsam
·It just looks like a gold or rose gold deluxe dial, its not uncommon for the hour markers and hands to end up paginating at a different rate from the dial on these especially if the its been exposed for a while as there’s that celluloid layer on the dial but not the hour markers, I’d guess the case was melted at some point for the gold content and the dial ended up getting saved.
Maybe just the photos thats playing a trick but I have never seen gold hardware on Omega dials aged to look silver.
- Posts
- 3,458
- Likes
- 13,288
MtV
·Btw my best guess at the first watch:
Early Constellation Deluxe dial and hands off something like an OT2799
Seamaster 14363 case
Late Constellation dogleg 168.005 caseback
Service replacement Constellation crown
Cal 551 movement out of a 168.007 / 14900 or similar
What puzzles me: 14363 and 14350 had snap-in case backs. The 168.005 is a screw-in. That must've been some work to make that fit.
- Posts
- 9,889
- Likes
- 55,980
gbesq
·It's a factory prototype snuck out the back door by a technician.
Seriously tho, I like it and see no problem with it. Put togethers can be fun.
- Posts
- 34,843
- Likes
- 39,407
dsio
··Ash @ ΩFWhat puzzles me: 14363 and 14350 had snap-in case backs. The 168.005 is a screw-in. That must've been some work to make that fit.
I think it was grand master watchmaker George Daniels who once said “if at first it doesn’t fit, use a bigger hammer”.
- Posts
- 3,458
- Likes
- 13,288
