What kind of extract is this?

I always thought, the year in the ref was not recorded in the archieves?

Here is a Speedmaster with "case number" 105.012-66 :
http://chronocentric.com/forums/chronotrader/index.cgi?md=read;id=49334

Yup.

http://speedmaster101.com/blog/omega-extracts-things-to-watch-out-for/

Yeah, that serial smudging is strange.

Don't think anything is wrong with this watch but it makes me wonder why the -66 is exactly specified. I've received an extract for my 105.012-65 a few weeks ago and only the ref without year was specified. So the answer of @abrod520 makes sense to me...

Not worthless, just misleading maybe, if you're not aware that older extracts are not as precisely based on Omega records.

Am I just stupid or the DON was just intentionnally scratched?

When I looked at the pics a few days ago, I have to admit the same thought did occur 🤔

Don't think so. In my opinion this is a "dot diagonal to 70" (B1/MWO) bezel or better known as dot over 90 - which is not longer visible here ;-)

I wonder who posted this offering here first asking: Just a Coincidence???

I saw it on chronocentric, but hadn't mentioned it here, as I don't have the knowledge to pass judgement yet... unlike your good self 👍

All of my extracts have a specific date of manufacture...that info had to come from somewhere.

oops, read the link, this is specific to the Speedmaster...mine are all Seamasters.

Thanx but I wasn't passing judgement. I don't have that much knowledge.That's why I asked a question. Seems as though I got an answer.

It doesn't apply to seamasters too? I thought the issue is that Omega used to basically echo back what you put in the request for an extract. Now, they only supply what they can substantiate from their records. In the case of speedmasters, they don't seem to supply the case reference date stamp anymore. On a recent one I got, it was marked 105.003, but didn't include the -65. It also included the date of delivery though.

Maybe Lemania didn't assemble seamasters as they did for a time for speedmasters?

Hello,

I am the seller of this Speedmaster and after reading this post I would like to provide some additional information.

Regarding the extract of archives, I do not pretend that this extract can 100% guarantee the originality of the watch. I know the problem with the older extracts. I bought this Speedmaster with this extract and I have not found necessary to request a newer because this serial number is quite consistent with other batches 105012-66 CB I've listed. Anyway, as said mac_omega, there will be no difficulty to obtain a new extract which will give, I think, the same production date than on this one (and in my opinion the only difference will cover the absence of the "66" at the reference of the case since, again, for me, this watch remains consistent between his reference and serial number).

About blurring the last 2 digits of the serial number that seems fishy to some as too well done, I can obviously provide a picture of the complete serial number. I use Lightroom software that is not exactly like Photoshop and has not exactly the same features. I certify that nothing else than the blurring of the serial number has been altered in the different pictures. Lighting pictures was made with a light box which gives a beautiful, soft light, but of course I can also take pictures on my balcony 😀

About the bezel, as well Cal_321 explained, it is also possible to differentiate a DON bezel depending on the diagonal point 70. Considering the price of DON bezel it is certain that I would not be amused me to make myself the crater at the 90 😀

Do not hesitate if you have further questions, I will answer gladly.