Reply With QuoteI am not surprised that you love them......nice collection. Enjoy.
The Omega's from the 70's were really innovative. I find them fascinating. Here are mine.
A hand wound Dynamic on a steel bracelet. These were also available on a leather strap.
capture
An Electroquartz. This is the second incarnation.
image hosting no sign up
A Megaquartz in stainless steel and 18K gold.
photo hosting
A Seamaster Hardmetal. The case is tungsten bombarded 1200 Vickers stainless steel.
img upload
An F300HZ Chronometer in stainless steel.
screenshot tool
An F300HZ day date in 20 microns gold.
jpg images
I hope you like them.
Last edited by NOODLES25; 25th February 2017 at 14:23.
I am not surprised that you love them......nice collection. Enjoy.
That's the only other megaquartz I've seen. Here's mine.
I'm also quite tempted by the f300 on SC at the moment.
Nice vintage collection you have there.
Lovely collection of vintage Omega's
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
An unusual and interesting collection.
The only thing I would say is that when Omega were messing around with F300's, Electroquartz etc and odd shapes/designs in the '70's it eventually caused them to lose parity with Rolex who in the main stuck with classic looking auto's apart from the OQ.
Cheers,
Neil.
Love the dynamic - great collection.
I love collections that have a theme, but still maintain variety. Well done, sir.
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
The sheer diversity of Omega's offerings in the late 60s/early 70s makes them interesting from a collector's perspective; there's something in there for everybody!
I own 3 Dynamics, it's fair to say I like 'em. The design only really works on a strap IMO, it gets 'lost' a little on a bracelet. Haven`t worked on one for a long while then, like buses, two arrived at once over the past couple of weeks! One's been easy to sort out whilst the other's been somewhat demanding to say the least. Refinishing the cases isn`t too difficult although often they have big dings out of the edges and that can`t be put completely right.
An interesting Dynamic fact: The case on the day/date cal 752 model is slightly thicker than the standard hand-wound 613 and automatic 565. They look identical till put side by side......not a lot of people know that! Also, the rarest version is the one with the cal 1481 movement, only produced for around 1-2 years. Looks like the 565 but the date window's in a slightly different place. The case reference is different and the dial's aren`t interchangeable.
Interesting point Neil made about Omega losing ground to Rolex during this era, I`d never thought of it like this. I guess the diversity of styles/products didn`t really help them although it's left a very fertile area for the collectors. Possibly (in hindsight) they committed too heavily towards the hummers?
Paul
I'm not an Omega expert by any means, but I'm not sure that the innovation and variation in Omega's output in the 1970s was the sole cause of the loss of parity with the far more conservative Rolex. It may have resulted in a lack of focus, but I think that the abandonment of their own in-house movements and the move towards ETA movements was more of a strategic mistake by Omega.
Omega made a huge range of fantastic Seamasters and Speedmasters in the 1970s. With regard to the former, there was the Ploprof, the Banana, the Baby Ploprof, Big Blue to name but a few. However, by the 1980s, I think that there was just the pre-Bond Seamaster. Whilst I have nothing against that watch, I don't think it holds a candle to the greats of the previous decade.
Omega certainly lost their way in the late 70s, most of their 80s output was very forgetable. The pre-Bond Seamaster pro was the beginning of the return to form IMO.
Replacing the 550 /600 calibres with the 1010 and 1030 (around 1970) was probably the point at which Omega lost ground to Rolex. The 1010 was their first high-beat movement, running at 28,800 bph. Technically it was supposed to be a step forward but those in the know criticise the design. Personally I've never had a problem with them, I've had several on the bench in various states of repair and I can't see a lot wrong. Aesthetically they don't look as nice, and the standard of finish isn't inpressive compared to the earlier ones. The mainspring' s huge and the auto-winding isn't tbe most efficient, but in my experience they seem to perform well enough even when old. This was Omega' s last true in - house movement and ironically it was designed to be very slim and compact.........yes, the slimmer the better was the ideal in the 70s!
Unfortunately Omega flirted with the use of plastic movement rings in the 70s and some of the watches show clear signs of cost-cutting in their designs. They just don't have the same quality feel as the earlier stuff.
One of the best 70s Omegas I've handled was a hand-wound gold-plated Geneve with a 1030. movement. The watch was in nice condition but certainly not top of the range in it's day, and the hand-wound movements were definitely in decline by 1977 when it was sold. However, after a thorough strip-down and service the watch performed well within COSC spec and the positional agreement was within a few seconds. This movement wasn't chronometer rated so I was mildly surprised by it. The watch hadn't had a hard life but I was amazed at how well it ran. One strange foible was the 50+ twists of the crown needed to wind it........that's due to the huge mainspring! I'd be happy to own one myself.
Given the current kudos attached to in-house movements perhaps it was a mistake to go down the ETA route. Personally I think not, the ETA movements are excellent and it was the most cost-effective way forward. OK, aesthetically they're a bit bland but they' re very good at what they set out to do. It's a bit like comparing a classic car to a modern...........both have their own appeal.
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 25th February 2017 at 22:27.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not an in-house movement snob by any means. I agree that ETA movements are very good, it's just that it was hard to argue parity with Rolex when Omega no longer used their own movements.
That really looks like a Patek PhilippeOriginally Posted by Dave+63
That's the only other megaquartz I've seen. Here's mine.
I'm also quite tempted by the f300 on SC at the moment.
Omega don't use their own movements??
Really?
Some corkers there. I love the tungsten Seamaster.
I was referring to the 1980s, when they had stopped using their own movements and used ETA calibres.
Love some of the late 60's/earlier 70's Omegas
Malc
FAP Speedie
Absolute beauties and it's what separates Omega from the Rolexes In that there are so many collectible different model options beyond some same model but minor Dial differentation found in Rolex. Now of course Omega vintage is rapidly going up in value but it still often offers you a 2 or even 3 Omegas for 1 Rolex price comparable.Love some of the late 60's/earlier 70's Omegas
Malc
FAP Speedie
The memomatic looks like its come straight from a Science Lab!
That's what I find quite amusing about Rolex collecting, everyone gets hung up on incredibly minor details and I`m sure part of the reason is the very limited range of watches Rolex actually made! People can collect Omegas yet have totally different tastes, it's a far more interesting sphere for collectors because the models are so different. Values have been modest and many models are still cheap to buy.
Paul
I picked up this early 70s Seamaster Flight recently, 1002 movement. It was a bit of an impulse buy so I must do a bit of research on it when I get a bit of time.
Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk
Great post and a lovely collection, I have never seen the Seamaster hardmetal before! I would love to hear more about it?
And thanks to the op for some fascinating information regarding this wonderful time period, which happens to be my favourite era.
I love 1970's Omega's, I agree wholeheartedly there is something for most collectors, I have several, my MegaQuartz is amongst my favourites. It has great wrist presence and the quality is evident all round.
I have a watch similar to this at home,
I inherited it but have never been able to find a picture of the exact watch. its similar to the above but with stepped edges if that makes sense....?
not for me, but do you see many about? I will get photos next weekend.
I found three of mine next to each other, so thought I would share:
usual apologies for bad photo.
Inherited this old piece, currently does not seem to be working. Can anyone tell me anything about it please??
Doesn't look to be gold going by the pics.
Get the back off and refer to the eight digit number on the movement, can easily date it from that.
Cheers,
Neil.
It's a square back, is it just a case of using a thin screwdriver to lever it off?
A thin knife blade will do it.
Cheers,
Neil.
Love the term 'electroquartz' it's soooooo 60/70's
Mozza
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
So having had the back off, it says:
Omega
161005
Scratched in H1544
18K
Does this mean anything to anyone? Would love to get this going again, and then decide whether to keep it or move it on.
I can't help much as the 161.005 (or 161.0005) does not appear in Omega's vintage database, nor can I find any examples online.
If you've had the back off a picture of the movement and the inside of the case back (along with the movement serial) might help others identify the calibre and any other background for you.
Not sure these pictures will come out clearly, as using a phone....
You're right...they are a bit too fuzzy. Going by your first photos you have a better setup, somewhere. When you get around to it, take a few of the movement with the rotor in different positions so that all of the markings and text are visible, in one or another. Somewhere, there should be an Ω somewhere with the calibre number and a movement serial may be around as well.
I will have to wait til next weekend when I'm home again. Do you have any idea of an approximate value for it? Is it worth paying for service/repair etc. Thank you for taking the time to reply.
That's good in a way. I'm not the one to ask about prices, but leaving it up here a week will give people with a better idea time to find your questions and hopefully provide decent answers when you post a picture update.
I have contacted the Omega museum, hopefully they may be able to offer some insight.
I'm always surprised there isn't more interest of this era of Omega, outside of the Speedmaster & divers.
Paul's two tone Constellation is a fantastic watch, the constellations seem a good entry point to the integrated bracelet luxury watch world?
I've also always been a dynamic fan, however have avoided them due to what I perceived as limited interest should I need to sell if I didn't get on with the shape.
It's an 18 carat case so worth a fair bit as scrap alone, possibly more than the watch is worth as a whole?
Certainly worth getting repaired if you want to keep it.
Cheers,
Neil.
It's not something I'd ever wear tbh, I'd rather sell it and put the money towards a watch I'd keep and wear everyday to remember him by. Just depends on whether it's financially more worthwhile to have it restored/serviced etc or sell for the gold value.
My little gold handwind Geneve from '74. T'was a 21st birthday present of my choosing, from my folks... still got it though!
Last edited by pinpull; 27th March 2017 at 16:37.
Just posted this photo in an Omega appreciation thread. Seems appropriate here too.
1967 Seamaster Cosmic. I don't know why but I like that the days are in French only.
I guess most people would think like you so pointless spending money on a restoration in that case.
Into the pot with it.
Cheers,
Neil.
Ok so back home on leave, and whipped the back off it again,
It's a 24 jewel movement, it has the omega symbol with 671 underneath it, and then in the most minuscule writing ever it has 22940221 stamped onto it.
I have had an email back from Omega which sadly has not added any light to the situation. I've looked through there archives and the closest thing I can find is the 1965 De Ville, but the pictures still don't match up exactly.
If you Google 'omega calibre 671 gold' and select images, you'll find several square shaped watches (including this one: link), but none with quite such an ornate case.
What size is the case? If you wouldn't wear it, might it interest a lady/girl in the family? I think that it would look good on a black lizard strap.
It's currently with a local jewellers for a valuation and for a servicing quote, they had quite a nice old bi metal seamaster in the window, not seen one with gold on before!
This, Put it on a strap & it's still very wearable as a dress watch.
So, the watch had been repaired and serviced, its running beautifully and on a new strap.
Decision time now, is whether to keep it or not.
The gentleman who repaired it has suggested that Stroud Auctionrooms is one of the best places to sell vintage watches in the Gloucestershire area, and according to him he thinks it will fetch a good price as it's an unusual model. In 30 years he's not seen another one apparently.
What are people's thoughts?
Trying to improve my imaging skills, I took this on my smartphone by the light of my laptop screen. One day I shall try using my camera if I can resist the urge to talk through it.
What is THAT? Wow. Absolutely love it.
That's lovely Alec.Trying to improve my imaging skills, I took this on my smartphone by the light of my laptop screen. One day I shall try using my camera if I can resist the urge to talk through it.
You didn't have to use your secret stash of '70's Mayfair as a background though.
Must admit it looks a jolly interesting issue though.
Cheers,
Neil.
Thanks Neil. It is a pocket watch movement that has found its way into a wristwatch case, which has the look of not having been made recently. 42mm case diameter, a nice wearable size, and a giant for the age of the movement due to its history.
I don't have a stash of Mayfairs, only the ones with me in them. You probably wondered where you have seen me before; that is it. If everyone turns to Mayfair Vol. 20 No. 4, that's me on p.66.
Posting Permissions
