Omega

Dear Omega enthusiasts,

several months ago I recieved a vintage Seamaster that I liked for the lovingly detailed execution of its dial:

 

Forgiving my mediocre photographic skills, you will notice the applied indices (wedge-shaped at 6, 9, 12 o´clock, baton-shaped at the other positions), the applied Omega logo and writing as well as the application surrounding the date window at the 3 o´clock position.

Subsequently I had the watch serviced by the Omega HQ in Germany (which cost much more than the watch itself), where the watch was supplied with new hands, a new plexy, crown and winding stem and the movement was overhault as well as the dial was refurbished.
This is the current, shiny look of the "old lady" (interstingly, that watches often carry the female sex, isn´t it. At least it is like this in English, French and German, other tongues may differ).

This watch currently comes closest to my idea of a classic wrist watch and it definitely stood the test of time. The movement number allows to date it back to 1960 (5 years older than me) and it preserved its look much better.

It sits very comfortable on my wrist with its 35 mm diameter, no bulging or dislodging which often occurs if I wear larger watches. I almost forget I am wearing a watch, so decently this one behaves. On the other hand it´s so nice that I often look at it, although I perfectly well know how late it is .

I sometimes wonder why they do no more make these watches nowadays. Am I the last dinosaur to appreciate such classic detailed execution and understatement? I don´t think so, because some fellow purists feel the same way.

On the other hand, how to improve something that is almost perfect?

Well, before I get taken away by more volatile thoughts, let´s have another look at the watch I currently cherish most after having been serviced:



If you ignore the dust (sorry!), you can see the sunbust finish of the dial and the applications to the dial.

 

This side view gives an impression of the three-dimensional structure and can you spot the signed plexy?

Not ultra-thin, but moderately sized. The short lugs add to its comfortable wear on my slim wrist.

 

 

May be it´s silly, but I like the seamonster engraving on the back. Finally a Nessie that can really be seen .

 

Inside view on the bottom of the watch which is a "top-loader", i.e. the glass has to be removed in order to get access to the movement, whereas the back cannot be removed at all.

 

The caliber 562, an automatic movement prior to servicing, allowing to date the watch to the year 1960 (courtesy of Istvan Csizmedia).

 

All bits and pieces assembled again.

 

Two classics united: the one sits on my wrist, the other in my trouser pocket.

Final wrist shot.

I hope you enjoyed this little jaunt in the vintage Omega world as much as I did preparing it (well, mostly to be honest, as the whole post disappeared after pushing the false key unintentionally, grrhhh).

Kind regards from an horological fossil,

anaesdoc

This message has been edited by anaesdoc on 2011-06-10 02:29:41 This message has been edited by anaesdoc on 2011-06-10 02:31:29 This message has been edited by anaesdoc on 2011-06-10 02:45:28

I enjoy, more than a new watch, when a vintage piece is renovated to the former glory.

Thanks for posting this one. I have one, currently on the "SPA", waiting for a bezel inlay, that I plan to post here.

Cheers and have a great weekend.

anaesdoc

These "minimalist Seamasters" as Desmond once called them, are wonderful watches.  Lightweight, comfortable, but with a proportionally large, legible dial.  The monococque case design is sturdy and easy to clean.

Mine is a ref 14725 from 1960, with cal 570 beating inside, and a serial number in the 17 millions, as is yours.  See below before it went off to Bienne for an overhaul.  It doesn't have the sunray finish on the dial, but I agree that the complex and beautiful dialwork is a marvel, especially considering the mid-range nature of these watches in 1960.

regards, Tom

 

Cazalea sent a similar watch pic in this week´s WS thread. Yes, these are timeless beauties, indeed!

Kind regards,

anaesdoc

No message body

...You have more than a few kindred spirits up here when it comes to those classic Omegas. I chose my 1963 Deville (now on black croc) as one to wear to IGOTT.

Two very nice vintage Omegas, you´ve got there yourself. Although their design does not differ grossly, they all have distinct characters in my perception.

This is another vintage Omega of mine that I like for its simplicity:

 

Kind regards,

anaesdoc

No message body

No message body

...came from a friend of his who restored it but never wore it.

No message body

and more now and yours is simply superb.  I like your passage "Subsequently I had the watch serviced by the Omega HQ in Germany (which cost much more than the watch itself") - yes I recognize this - I've done exactly that myself.

I have just acquired a 1963 Seamaster cal 552 and I am really taken with the quality and finish so I'm now trawling for others.  Good Constellations now cost a small fortune but Seamasters can still be picked up relatively cheaply (and they're almost as good IMHO).

Best wishes and thanks for sharing

Andrew

Yes, Andrew, like you I think they are really good value for money and did not only stand the aesthetic test of time, but also the technical one as they run very reliable after more than 50 years. Like they used to advertize the old Beetle: "It runs, and runs and runs ..."

Kind regards,

anaesdoc

as you know i only collect from 1964, but i have too many classic Omegas from that year to show you. i love the quality of the movements, cases and dials(most of which are original). the value for money is amazing and there are very few companies that make anything matching them today.

i've bought a few other brands recently, mainly because i've got to the stage where the Omega's i want are getting harder to find. i see no point buying multiple movements unless they have very different style casings/dials. i'm on the look out for piepan connie as my connie has a redial with incorrect spelling and in my dreams, a railmaster, but i cant think of any others off the top of my head that i dont have. if anyone who knows my collection can come up with a model i dont yet have please let me know.

so after all that i fully agree with you, vintage Omega's are superb for many many reasons.

best

Graham

only 'simple' watches included, no chrono's or divers (or Connies for that matter).

great thread which gives us the chance to explore our vintage delights.

Graham

No message body

Here is a couple of 1964 Deville's

Best

Thomas

Your pics illustrate our common liking for Omegas best and show you´ve got a nice share of them

Enjoy,

anaesdoc

Well Graham,

it´s quite obvious to me that you are far more justified to mourn about the fact that I complained about.  My interest in vintage Omega´s is only punctual (if I like a particular watch/dial) and less comprehensive than yours. Of course I am aware of not being the only fossil who takes a liking to these timepieces. But I wonder whether we are such a small group in total numbers that the watch brands do not take our preference into account and build their often much bigger, heavier and expensive watches. I would also be interested in buying a new watch with similar features like the vintage ones, but they are rare to be found.
Their is a big department store in  Germany called "Manufactum" which specialized in finding the "good old things", i.e. products that are functional, enduring, reasonably priced and nice to look at. This concept is very successful as people support this idea. Shouldn´t the same apply to the watch business, where the term "manufacture" has an even more fascinating tone?

Kind regards,

anaesdoc

Graham, I also suppose they are mostly concerned about sales values and gains and as long a people are willing to pay the prices, the business runs well.
Of course they also talk about heritage, dedication to horology and manufacture tradition, but I often do not really believe them and feel it´s more or less a PR thing as customers (including myself) like to hear such stuff.

Am I too pessimistic?

anaesdoc 

But the problem is that in 1984, Hayek's right hand  Ernst Thomke dedcided to get rid of all the tooling that was used to manufacture the vintage OMEGA movements and since that day OMEGA lost its manufacture status and became assembleur using ETA ebauches. ETA movements are nothing spectacular in terms of quality  they are considerated by purists as middle of the range quality movements but nothing stellar nor comparable to Omega vintage movements in terms of quality, durability and finish. Now OMEGA is all marketing hype and not what has made it worldwide reputation based on legendary quality ad accuracy maong decades.  

That just makes it worse because all the best stuff they had is not existing anymore. You can read this fact in the book Omega saga. This message has been edited by georgeszaslavsky on 2011-06-12 02:58:08

. . . that is one special Seamaster, Andreas!  And I completely agree - vintage Omega is immensely satisfying.  They're great performers, easily restored, and aesthetically tasteful. 
What else could a Purist ask for?

Cordially, Art