Vintage Speedmaster Dial - Whats the matter??

Posts

2,077

Likes

2,835

Passover

·Oct 18, 2019

I don't want to buy this, I just want to know what you think about this rough texture...

Thanks for looking!

 

Posts

405

Likes

2,020

Pianist

·Oct 18, 2019

Water damage I think

 

Posts

1,716

Likes

5,190

Screwbacks

·Oct 18, 2019

must be NOS stock, old applied logo, non pro, probably due to long storage.

 

Posts

74

Likes

174

aginoz

·Oct 19, 2019

The bubbling has not resulted in any paint or lume loss. I’d be surprised of it was caused by water as that would be seen on the lume as well - discolored/mouldy. This looks like the dial surface of a Tudor snowflake.

 

Posts

10,305

Likes

16,125

padders

·Oct 19, 2019·Oooo subtitles!

Wide Ts on a non Pro dial? Am thinking redial or service dial. No straight lug has that configuration AFAIK

 

Posts

1,790

Likes

2,001

michael22

·Oct 19, 2019

The minute marks on the 3 subdial are irregular, especially 10-15.

 

Posts

2,077

Likes

2,835

Passover

·Oct 19, 2019

Whole offer is obscure / fake:

"105.012-63, Pre-Pro dial

....the watch came out exactly as is from Omega factory. The watch is in mint condition, really untoched and bought directly in Mexico ( where the watch was delivery from Omega) from the first owner."

with wrong crown and superluminova hands IMO

 

Posts

731

Likes

1,630

djmusicman

·Oct 19, 2019

Passover

"105.012-63, Pre-Pro dial

....the watch came out exactly as is from Omega factory. The watch is in mint condition, really untoched and bought directly in Mexico ( where the watch was delivery from Omega) from the first owner."

I met a watchmaker who had a watch like that (105.012-63 pro case with a 2 line dial). He thought it was correct but most collectors don't think it is. One theory is that they used to mix up parts when servicing back in the day. But has anyone ever seen an Ed White with a Professional dial? I'm not sure how we can get to the bottom of this.

 

Posts

1,344

Likes

1,966

simonsays

·Oct 19, 2019

It is an interesting watch. So much is right with it I would like to believe the story. The wide T sort of spoil it if we are to believe MWO as they suggest this print did not arrive until 1965-66.
Even so what happened to the Professional? There are no (non pro)dials like it in MWO.

Edited: Oct 19, 2019

 

Posts

1,344

Likes

1,966

simonsays

·Oct 19, 2019

padders

Wide Ts on a non Pro dial? Am thinking redial or service dial. No straight lug has that configuration AFAIK

Agreed, but I don't think service dials existed until more recently, why not just use a standard production dial, and I have never seen anyone try to redial a speedmaster, because its much easier to just get a replacement dial

 

Posts

1,344

Likes

1,966

simonsays

·Oct 19, 2019

I wonder if someone sprayed the dial with some kind of lacquer?

I notice a service dust cover to go with the suspect hands, so not quite untouched.

Edited: Oct 19, 2019

 

Posts

10,305

Likes

16,125

padders

·Oct 19, 2019·Oooo subtitles!

simonsays

Agreed, but I don't think service dials existed until more recently, why not just use a standard production dial, and I have never seen anyone try to redial a speedmaster, because its much easier to just get a replacement dial

There are of Speedmaster redials out there, usually they aren't all that great. 321 service dials appeared shortly after the transition to 861 occurred, as regular 321 dial production had moved over to the 861s. This was ~1970 onwards, presumably as stocks of -67/68 dials dried up. Some had step and AML, others had the step and no AML (I have one of these). The dial shown in the OP post certainly wasn't fitted by the factory to an Ed White in period as that would have narrow Ts and wasn't fitted to a Pro as that would have narrow Ts and be marked Pro, ergo it must be either a redial or replacement. The fact it doesn't fit the pattern of any other seen and is covered in Hammerite make me put my money on redial.

Edited: Oct 19, 2019

 

Posts

1,344

Likes

1,966

simonsays

·Oct 19, 2019

For me the dial is too good to be a redial, all the fonts and positioning are perfect for a wide T Professional dial, all that’s missing is the Professional, and the strange finish.
It certainly raises questions,

 

Posts

13,487

Likes

53,052

Larry S

·Oct 20, 2019·Color Commentator for the Hyperbole.

In UG we’d call that a “prototype” 😁.

 

Posts

18,099

Likes

27,413

Foo2rama

·Oct 20, 2019·Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...

It’s obviously a later service with the wrong service dial added. As seen by the luminova hands.

I don’t see any mystery. We are constantly seeing new service dial variations as they where ordered in small batches.

 

Posts

1,344

Likes

1,966

simonsays

·Oct 20, 2019

Foo2rama

It’s obviously a later service with the wrong service dial added. As seen by the luminova hands.

I don’t see any mystery. We are constantly seeing new service dial variations as they where ordered in small batches.

That just does not tie in. There are no dials like that being used at the same time as Luminova hands were being used

 

Posts

1,344

Likes

1,966

simonsays

·Oct 20, 2019

The dial looks very much a 1960s dial and an Omega item to me. The how and why is mysterious though.

 

Posts

18,099

Likes

27,413

Foo2rama

·Oct 20, 2019·Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...

simonsays

That just does not tie in. There are no dials like that being used at the same time as Luminova hands were being used

Who said omega serviced it? It’s a pre 1978 service dial.

it’s being portrayed as an untouched watch in the add. It’s obviously not. It’s cobbled together.

 

Posts

1,245

Likes

4,777

time flies

·Oct 20, 2019

Having read all of the above and based on nothing but looks...I like the look of the bubbling/textured black. Not unlike the spray on stuff available many places for many purposes. Just saying.

have fun
kfw

 

Posts

1,344

Likes

1,966

simonsays

·Oct 20, 2019

.

Foo2rama

Who said omega serviced it? It’s a pre 1978 service dial.

it’s being portrayed as an untouched watch in the add. It’s obviously not. It’s cobbled together.

l wouldn’t have thought an independent watchmaker would have such a dial sitting in his parts draw for 40 years but stranger things have happened.

Looking at the dial characteristics it could only be appropriate as a service dial made between 1970-74. I just don’t think Omega were making such a thing.
It would be useful if another example turned up