Ok, now I'm confused. I'm looking at a watch on eBay that seems to have a lovely sharp case. The caseback is pretty good. The movement looks a little of, but the hands and dial are immaculate (and I believed correct) even though the MOY test is touch and go. Then I noticed the Ts on the dial. I'm assuming its been redialled, but I can't imagine what could have happened to require a redial on such a lightly used watch, and why you would have such a good redial, but miss the Ts. Anyone able to guess what the story is? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mens-NICE...S-Chronometer-Double-DATE-Watch-/140865649442Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
Remember most watches are sold to non-collectors. Many Jewelers sell watches and they feel the watch must look like new to sell. The public is unaware that redialing is not necessarily good. Also many watches, such as the one above have the cases refinished so the dial may match. Omega is going to refinish the case if you send it in to them and this is not necessarily bad if done properly or with restraint. That is, not using the 12 in buffing wheel as Dennis calls it.
So what exactly do we make of the... Clearly marked T SWISS MADE T but completely lacking any trace of luminous on the dial or hands.
I'd need to see it up close and personal. It's very difficult to replicate the "linen" look in a redial. gatorcpa
The fonts look too wide, as if they were stretched sideways a bit. I'd vote redial or at least re-inked.
I guess that's what confused me. It looks really genuine, but clearly ever had lume - it can't be easy getting it that good... And then such a basic, obvious mistake...
Ok, just resurrecting this one briefly. The seller has updated in response to a question about the 'T' that he can see where the tritium dots sat on the dial and that the hands used to have tritium inserts. I call 'bollocks' on that one - I have a very similar stainless steel Connie and a) I'm pretty sure I can see with the naked eye there's nowhere for dots and b) there is no way the hands ever had an insert, so unless anyone here can correct me im now faced with two questions - is this (presumably) knowledgeable and experienced watch maker deliberately misleading buyers and b) where did he get a dial that good?
It could be that only the hands had lume and they were replaced. The black hands currently on the watch are also correct for this style, I've seen them both ways. It's pretty much impossible to know the whole truth. FWIW, this seller is known for having pretty good vintage American watches. He usually gets premium prices on eBay. Don't know how much he knows about vintage Omega, it's so easy to be fooled on these. Hope this helps, gatorcpa