Will redialed watches always continue to be frowned upon...

Posts
1,288
Likes
3,352
I don´t get the point here...

It is neither a chronometer reference case nor does the dial say chronometre to start with.

The only correct part in this total Franken watch is the movement.

Agreed on all points. Merely sharing because the dial itself is so similar to @jumpingsecond 's example that I assume it was done by the same individual. I figured he'd be interested to see it. I assume there aren't many of them around?
 
Posts
3,554
Likes
7,591
Agreed on all points. Merely sharing because the dial itself is so similar to @jumpingsecond 's example that I assume it was done by the same individual. I figured he'd be interested to see it. I assume there aren't many of them around?
I see... You are right, there were also sold non chronometre versions long time ago
 
Posts
431
Likes
632
I agree with @Mouse_at_Large: I think we're looking at 2 distinctly different market segments here. There will always be those who value originality above everything else and likewise those who want to have a watch that looks like "new". I don't think there are "rights" and "wrongs" here - just different aspirations.
So long as there is no deliberate subterfuge involved, and redials etc. are clearly described as such, I don't see a problem. The problems arise when items are described as something they are not. Unfortunately, so long as there is a significant difference in value between "original" and "redialled", there will always be unscrupulous individuals trying to fool the unwary....
 
Posts
870
Likes
2,386
Thanks for sharing R3! I did a comparison but I'm not sure these dials share the same exact source-Here is a side by side. Note the different OMEGA fonts- mine is flat A his is pointed. Also the symbols are different if you look closely, and the sector line falls differently on his E than on mine. FWIW when I got mine, the source insisted it was an original factory dial from Omega bc that is what they told him (he had it serviced in Bienne in 2005). I've run the watch photos by a multitude of experts on this forum and there's no hard and fast consensus on it, except that it's probably not original at the time the movement was cased and left the factory. Through my own research- my feeling is it could be a factory NOS dial that has replaced the old original dial at some point during a service, but even there I'll defer to experts here.

 
Posts
3,554
Likes
7,591
Here is one of mine but with center seconds



has also a flat A



the non chronometer version has a pointed A and a slightly different logo

It is the same with the sub-second versions I have seen:

chronometer with flat A
non chronometer with pointed A

As we have observed in this thread (see above)
 
Posts
34,255
Likes
38,881
Here is one of mine but with center seconds



has also a flat A



the non chronometer version has a pointed A and a slightly different logo

It is the same with the sub-second versions I have seen:

chronometer with flat A
non chronometer with pointed A

As we have observed in this thread (see above)
Damn Eric, those are beautiful
 
Posts
2,043
Likes
5,505
I agree with @Mouse_at_Large: I think we're looking at 2 distinctly different market segments here. There will always be those who value originality above everything else and likewise those who want to have a watch that looks like "new". I don't think there are "rights" and "wrongs" here - just different aspirations.
So long as there is no deliberate subterfuge involved, and redials etc. are clearly described as such, I don't see a problem. The problems arise when items are described as something they are not. Unfortunately, so long as there is a significant difference in value between "original" and "redialled", there will always be unscrupulous individuals trying to fool the unwary....

100% agree with your comments re. passing off known redials as original. This is fraud and is indefensible. With regard to the difference in value, a "collector" might consider that a redialled/refurbished watch that shows no patination or signs of ageing is worth less than an "honestly" aged example. A non-collector might look at an aged/patinated example and wonder why anyone would pay more (or the same) as for a pristine restored example. But maybe that's just opening a whole other

 
Posts
870
Likes
2,386
Here is one of mine but with center seconds



has also a flat A



the non chronometer version has a pointed A and a slightly different logo

It is the same with the sub-second versions I have seen:

chronometer with flat A
non chronometer with pointed A

As we have observed in this thread (see above)


Erich your gold SC version must be same dial-origin as my Subsecond no? Do you have any idea how they came to be?
 
Posts
766
Likes
744
I just want to add the beauty of original dials. Once you get used to see and admire them (even with patina), I find very hard to go for a very clean redial, just because it (usually) it not so pretty. I understand that a destroyed dial can be repainted to save a watch for rarity or sentimental reasons. But if I go to purchase a watch I want the dial to be original. They are sooo beautiful!. Maybe not as new or clean or white (or black or whatever the background color is). But ...