Vintage Omegas: What is a jumbo model?

I have been interested in “jumbo” Omegas for a while, but now that I have acquired a few described as such, I’m not sure I’ve yet really handled a jumbo model.

When I got my hands on a 166.011, I didn’t immediately notice a size difference between it and similar contemporaneous models like the 166.010/168.024, of which I am an aficionado. However, 36.0mm does feel substantial on the wrist. (I bought this caliper* specifically to convince myself that the 166.011 was indeed larger.)

* These calipers? This pair of calipers? I’m a professional grammarian; I’m supposed to know this stuff.

Maybe the case shrunk overnight, but now I’m getting 35.9mm.

Here it is side by side with an early-1970s 160.0001.

The 168.0001 has been called a jumbo as well, but I’m having a hard time seeing the case for categorizing it as such. Mine has precisely the same case diameter as my 166.010, which I’ve never thought of or seen described as a jumbo model.


L-R: 168.0001, 166.010, 168.024. The rightmost watch is sitting slightly closer to the camera but has the same case as the middle watch.



I was ready to claim that all three of the watches in the second shot have the same case, but in fact the 168.0001 has a more voluptuous curve to the top of its lugs, while the 166.010/168.024 is sleeker. I thought I had taken photos of the comparative measurements before dropping off the 166.010 for service, but no. However, endlinks do seem to fit the two different cases differently.


The top photo is the 166.010 and the bottom the 168.0001. These endlinks are not identical, so I need to do more research when I have both watches in hand, but I’m pretty sure the 168.0001 has a thicker case.

Anyway, I’m sure it’s been discussed before, but I’m procrastinating and seeking attention, so what makes an Omega watch a jumbo model? Was the 166.010 case seen as a significant step up in size from earlier 33-34mm sized watches? Did the bigger 36-38mm cases, whether Omega or from other makers, first emerge in the Asian market as it seems, and does anyone know of any marketing material that drew attention to these larger models?

In fairness I have been confused for some time, but this seems like a valid way of looking at it.

At 35.7mm. would my 2367 circa. 1947 be considered a “jumbo” ?

Tony I think that handbook just described 90% of all Invictas made.

I'd say right on the border.

In my opinion and vintage watch over 37mm it's "jumbo". Of course I do not know exactly which one will be considered "vintage"..😀

I generally think "Jumbo" is at least 36.5mm while "Oversize" is anything over 38mm in diameter. But again I don't believe anyone has set a rule.

The idea that “jumbo” indicates a larger version of another model has a satisfying logic to it.
So that would make the 166.011 a jumbo because it’s otherwise styled like this 2759?


My caliper(s) technique needs a lot of work.

In other news, I had not previously appreciated how well the older watch goes with a BOR bracelet.

I'll agree with what Dan S said - it's all relative. Perhaps rarity plays a role too - if a watch is produced in 38mm but a rare example exists in 34mm, we don't call that smaller model a 'mini', and it won't be as desirable even if it's rare. It seems like larger variants are by default less common and more desirable than their smaller counterparts.