Omega speedmaster 4.5 - bracelet authenticity question!

[kevkojak]

Morning all.
I'm looking at a speedmaster 4.5 on ebay which I like the look of. The lume and dial detail have faded to just a perfect tone and it looks like a nice honest case - not messed with and not polished. Worn, not abused.
The bracelet, however.... hmmmm. Reference 1152/173. I can't find any mention of that when I'm looking at speedmaster spec and I can't get over how much of a lug gap it leaves, looks like about 2 or 3mm. Is this even a proper omega bracelet? The quality looks crap and the text looks iffy too. Would I be on the money suggesting this might be a cheap folded steel one from China?

I love the case and I'd probably put it on a NATO anyway, but I'm not bidding up for a complete watch (as the seller is touting it) if the bracelet is a knock off. Its obviously not original to the watch, I'm trying to suss if its even real.

I'd love another Speedy Pro but I'm priced right out of that market now. Even the mk2 has rocketed to where I'm uncomfortable. The mk3 and mk4.5 though, I'm thinking I might just tick them off the bucket list while they are still at sensible dosh.

Thanks to our resident Omega people.

Here's the watch;
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/305045753...mis&media=COPY

[Sinnlover]

The lug size is totally wrong so it’s not original to the watch regardless if authentic or not
The stamping on the clasp does not look good I have to say
I thought it might be a flightmaster bracelet at first but the lug size is too small and mine is marked 172.

[Kingstepper]

The 1162 was available as 162, 172 or 173, the 172 -2mm wider than 173 so would be a better fit.

Maybe 1152 similar, if genuine.

[RS404]

I was watching one of these on eBay a couple of months ago, it went for about £1350 and seemed a fair bit tidier than this one.

Sent from my SM-A217F using Tapatalk

[walkerwek1958]

I worked on one of these several years ago and frankly I can`t find much good to say about this model. Big ugly chunk of steel, needs to be in really sharp condition cosmetically to look anything like right, and that involves refinishing on a lapping machine. The movement is Omega's version of the Lemania 5100 which is prone to serious issues owing to the use of a Perspex plate for the date complication, Perspex cracks eventually and it's trouble waiting to happen IMO, the movement is horrible.

As pointed out, the bracelet's wrong on this one, the end pieces are integral to the bracelet and it doesn`t belong with this watch.

This looks like a tired example that could cost ££££ to sort out. One to avoid IMO, if you like this model buy a good one, or buy the Mk 4 with the 1040 movement that's far better than this.

[John Wall]

Is the seller describing a different watch ?

The near perfect (dubious) bracelet has a huge scratch on the clasp
and the barely visible scratch on the face looks very much like a chip.

[kevkojak]

Cheers all. I'll swerve this one, I think it's the mkIII I really want anyway so I'll duck this one.
Thanks.

[unclealec]

Is it me, or does the clasp claim to be made from "stanless" steel?

[John Wall]

That’s a good spot
Also, top right, would bracelets of this apparent era have pin out direction arrows ?
I thought that was more of a recent-ish thing