Speedy hands??

[a.json]

Hello!
My first posting here on this great forum.
I have a couple of Speedmaster cal 321...and on one of them is a red hand.
Is it possible that the Speedmaster has been made with a red hand? I have been told both that it has never been like that , and some say that it might be original.
Id be happy to hear some opinions on the issue!
Thanks!
//A.Json

[eptaz]

Welcome and thanks for sharing your beautiful cal. 321s :-!
Anything is possible, but I'm inclined to believe the hand was replaced by one meant for an orange Mark II.

eric

[SteveW62]

Hi Guys,

In the film "Marooned" ( 1969 - Gene Hackman ), you can clearly see a speedy with a central red second hand.

I saw an advertising board on eBay, that had a title something like "Starring the Omega Speedmaster" ( the first space product placement for Omega ? ), which put me onto the film.

The watch plays absolutely no part in the film whatsoever,but is clearly featured for a few seconds. I took a snap out of the film.
here it is.

http://www.a-k-d.com/watches/omega/pics/maroonedspeedy.jpg


I find it interesting/unlikely that a film director would go to trouble of painting that hand red.

I know we have no or little chance of ever finding out 100%, but could it be possible that this watch left the factory like this ?

All the Best

Steve

[a.json]

Hi again!
Thanks for your great replies...the pic from the film is really amazing,i agree that a producer wouldnt bother to replace a hand...and if its an Omega product placement it would be the way the watch :thanks left the factory.
I bought mine from a friend that said his uncle bought it brand new and that hes the only owner...so it might be original.
Could anyone at Omega know about it?
But on the other hand..its nothing thats special about the hand...its like Flightmaster or many other red hands from different Omegas.
So i might never really know!
Thanks anyhow for your opinions.
Regards//A.Json

[eptaz]

Thanks for the info, Steve. It wouldn't have been quite as drastic or strange as painting the hand, since it's a different style but, simply using an entirely different hand. Of course, as you know, Omega wasn't as particular about parts as they are today, so they may have sent a few out like this.
I have seen a couple others, over time, too.
Anything is possible, I suppose...and the world may never know :-D

eric

[Speedmeister]

This is a very interesting question, Can you prove that the watch came that
way? I have seen others with that hand,one was just on auction site in
fact. :think:

[Speedmeister]

Also, Curiously, Otto Frei sells a second hand listed specifically for .321 movements.... it is this orange hand :-S

he calls it "Omega Cal. 321 Orange Sweep Second Hand
The original Wow color hand, 13.45 mm."

http://www.ofrei.com/page830.html


What does this all mean?

JM where are you when we need you O|

[eptaz]

Also, Curiously, Otto Frei sells a second hand listed specifically for .321 movements.... it is this orange hand :-S

he calls it "Omega Cal. 321 Orange Sweep Second Hand
The original Wow color hand, 13.45 mm."

http://www.ofrei.com/page830.html


What does this all mean?

JM where are you when we need you O|
My guess is that the hand is intended for a cal. 321 Seamaster, like this one.
http://homepage.mac.com/eptaz/.Pictures/watches/other/sm/321sm_black.jpg

I don't know that anyone outside of Omega could definitively say whether this hand was factory installed on a Moonwatch.

As an interesting sidenote, there have been reports that Omega produced a cal. 321 "exotic" Speedy, like this one.
http://homepage.mac.com/eptaz/.Pictures/watches/other/new_speedy_exotic2.jpg
In fact, there is a photo of a 105.012 in Goldberger's Omega Watches. It has the typical, slab-sided Speedy hand, except it is the same reddish orange. I know that this isn't the Omega Bible, by any means, but I thought it was interesting enough to mention.

eric

[Speedmeister]

My guess is that the hand is intended for a cal. 321 Seamaster, like one of these.

Now we're getting somewhere... That is an excellent theory, Eric. :-!
What years were that prticular .321 Seamaster made? I have seen that Seamaster, but I didn't think it ever had a .321 movt. :think:

It seems likely Omega could have mixed up the hands, as .321 Seamaster and .321 Speedmaster would have come out of the same parts bins. Especially with all the other mix ups going on around the late 60's :oops:


As an interesting sidenote, there have been reports that Omega produced a cal. 321 "exotic" Speedy, like this one.
eric

This, I don't buy... Wrong bezel and no TRITIUM!!!!

Speedmeister

[eptaz]

I think it's safe to say that style Seamaster started production near the end of the 321 era (67-68) and continued on, using the 861.

Sorry for the confusion on the "exotic" Speedy. The photo is of a newer one, in limited production, I believe for the Japanese market. Obviously, the cal. 321 would have had the features of that time.

eric

[Speedmeister]

I think it's safe to say that style Seamaster started production near the end of the 321 era (67-68) and continued on, using the 861.

Yes, I was going to say 66 on. It all makes sense.

Great... I think it might be safe to say that on 145.012 at least, there are 3 different second hands that may have come on it originally. :roll: Although in my mind there is only one CORRECT one :-D

I think from 1965-1970 Omega must have had one deranged rogue watchmaker in the shop. This one maniac messed up a lot of watches.

[SteveW62]

Hi Guys,



Yes there are quite a few Seamaster Chrono's with 321's in them ( basically most of them before/around 1968 should have a 321 in them ).

Another possible source for the red/orange centre second hand could be the flightmaster. Although the movement is either a 910 or 911, that is basically a modified 861. You can't see a difference, If you look at the 910 / 911 or 861 from the back.

I've had a quick look through the Goldberger book when it arrived. Pages 228 & 229 show "older" Racing dials ( but not marked as MK II ) here's Eric pic again.

http://homepage.mac.com/eptaz/.Pictures/watches/other/new_speedy_exotic2.jpg

What I find interesting about these 2 particular pics are the dials.

on both pics, the dials are clearly marked T SWISS MADE T.

On 228 the , with the exception of the subdials, the dial appers to be flat.
on 229 the dialed is clealy "stepped" around the edge of the hour markers ( indicating an older dial ).

Both appear to have modified ( ie painted ) Centre second hands.


Lots of posibilities & few answers. I LIKE a challenge :-)


S.

[eptaz]

Yes, I was going to say 66 on. It all makes sense.

Great... I think it might be safe to say that on 145.012 at least, there are 3 different second hands that may have come on it originally. :roll: Although in my mind there is only one CORRECT one :-D

I think from 1965-1970 Omega must have had one deranged rogue watchmaker in the shop. This one maniac messed up a lot of watches.
:-D He must have been almost as sleepy as I was last night ;-)
But really, I think the spearpoint to slab-sided sweep second is pretty easy to accept (though, it would have been nice for collectors, if all 321 had the spearpoint, and all 861 had the slab-sided). Let's just call it a nonlinear progression.
The red-orange MkII-style hand is a bit harder to take, as it presumably wasn't intended for use on the Moonwatch. If any came from the factory, I'd be more inclined to call that a "mistake."
My 145.012-68 is one of the last of the 321s, and it came with the newer, slab-sided hand. It's interesting to note that there's a subtle difference from newer hands. Can you spot it?
http://homepage.mac.com/eptaz/.Pictures/watches/speedy/321oldhands.jpg

eric

[eptaz]

...What I find interesting about these 2 particular pics are the dials.

on both pics, the dials are clearly marked T SWISS MADE T.

On 228 the , with the exception of the subdials, the dial appers to be flat.
on 229 the dialed is clealy "stepped" around the edge of the hour markers ( indicating an older dial ).

Both appear to have modified ( ie painted ) Centre second hands.


Lots of posibilities & few answers. I LIKE a challenge :-)


S.
Good points, Steve. That's what I was trying to say about the hand, when I said " It has the typical, slab-sided Speedy hand, except it is the same reddish orange." My tired brain didn't spit it out quite right.
It's also interesting to note the subtle differences in the "Speedmaster" script between the two dial (note both "s's" and the "m"). That might be an entirely new discussion, as Omega changed that at least seven or eight times, over the years. I guess they wanted to give us something to talk about ;-)

eric

[a.json]

I´m more than happy with all your vise opinions on the hands issue.
Let´s say like Steve...theres only one center seconds hand that...for most people a the right one...and its the white one with the right end. But i think i keep the red on one of my cal 321...and now i got a few lines to drop if anyone comes with besserwisser arguments about the hand :-)
I will come back with issues on my Seamaster ¨Anakin Skywalker¨ soon
Regards//Arne Json

[psychlist]

My 145.012-68 is one of the last of the 321s, and it came with the newer, slab-sided hand. It's interesting to note that there's a subtle difference from newer hands. Can you spot it? eric

I dug out my 2002 Speedy to compare seconds hands. I thought I could see two possible differences - firstly, the older one on your watch looks slightly hollow along its length (the newer one is flat) and secondly, the newer one is slightly longer, just overlapping the outer seconds markers.

Do I win the prize? ;-)

[eptaz]

I dug out my 2002 Speedy to compare seconds hands. I thought I could see two possible differences - firstly, the older one on your watch looks slightly hollow along its length (the newer one is flat) and secondly, the newer one is slightly longer, just overlapping the outer seconds markers.

Do I win the prize? ;-)
Whew, I was afraid someone would say "the crappy lume job." ;-)
Yes, I was referring to the indentation running the length of the hand. You may be correct about the length, too, though a slight shift in the viewing angle might explain that.
Now that I'm looking at it more, it looks like the diamond on the old hand is shifted, and closer to the end of the hand, than on the new one. I'll have to do some more comparing.
Prize...yeah...that feeling of knowing you're right ;-) Pretty lame, eh?

eric

[georges zaslavsky]

I have never seen a 321 speedy pro with a markII dial. I think asking Marco Richon about it is the best way to be sure that watch was really existed and ditto for the speedmaster with the red hand (which is an aberation and more a franken watch than something else).

The 321 watch with markII or racing dial is a franken because there is no t-swiss made-t on the dial and the dial and hands are luminova ones, conclusion it is not a 100% original watch.

regards

georges

[eptaz]

...The 321 watch with markII or racing dial is a franken because there is no t-swiss made-t on the dial and the dial and hands are luminova ones, conclusion it is not a 100% original watch.

regards

georges
Georges, "sorry for the confusion on the "exotic" Speedy. The photo is of a newer one, in limited production, I believe for the Japanese market. Obviously, the cal. 321 would have had the features of that time."
The 321 in the Goldberger book has a T-Swiss-T tritum dial and hands.

eric

[Speedmeister]

My 145.012-68 is one of the last of the 321s, and it came with the newer, slab-sided hand. It's interesting to note that there's a subtle difference from newer hands. Can you spot it?

Yes, good eye Eric :-! I have noticed this "ridge" before, but I wasn't sure if it was just my imagination. It's a good thing to look for when judging originality.

So, to recap... If your 145.012 has a ridged slab sided hand, counterpoise hand, or even orange hand, we can consider it to be original, if the rest of the watch appears original as well.

I know there are mixed opinions on the orange hand, but I have seen enough of them, for me to beleive that they originally came that way.

Speedmeister

[Speedmeister]

Hi Guys,

In the film "Marooned" ( 1969 - Gene Hackman ), you can clearly see a speedy with a central red second hand.

I find it interesting/unlikely that a film director would go to trouble of painting that hand red.

Great post Steve :-! I think this picture sheds alot of light on the orange hand theory, at least for me anyway. I don't think many people have ever seen this, I certainly never have.

If the movie came out in 1969, then they were filming in maybe as early as 1966ish. In any case, it is certainly a pic of a 145.012, or 105.012 with a orange hand that we can date to the late 60's. Like you said, it is doubtful the director would modify the watch.

Speedmeister

[eptaz]

I dunno. I'm still not convinced on the red-orange hand. I think its appearance in the film is interesting, but it also seems unlikely that the watch used in the movie happened to be such a rare example. I know we're just speculating, so I'll speculate a bit further ;-) Notice the hand in the screengrab isn't zeroed. I don't know the context of the scene and, maybe the chronograph was started a few seconds prior to the grab but, it's possible that the hand was replaced, and replaced poorly.
The mystery continues...

eric

[Speedmeister]

I dunno. I'm still not convinced on the red-orange hand. I think its appearance in the film is interesting, but it also seems unlikely that the watch used in the movie happened to be such a rare example. I know we're just speculating, so I'll speculate a bit further ;-) Notice the hand in the screengrab isn't zeroed. I don't know the context of the scene and, maybe the chronograph was started a few seconds prior to the grab but, it's possible that the hand was replaced, and replaced poorly.
The mystery continues...

eric

Yes, you are right, this is all just pure speculation. I wouldn't want people to take this thread or my posts as fact.

But since were speculating.. :-)

I'm glad that you pointed out that the hand is not zeroed. It is where it would be if you ran the chrono for 2 seconds, just past the applied logo.

When I wear my Speedy I stop the chrono at the 5 second mark, and I have a feeling a lot of other people do too. Perhaps because it looks better and you can see the logo. It also seems to give the watch "action" Otherwise you might get the impression it was stopped. Maybe the director also felt this way.

Also, I don't know how rare of an example the orange hand speedy is... I have seen quite a few of them.

Speedmeister

[graziad21]

Hello. This is my first post.
I am also interested in this thread and all info that might come on "possibly" original c.321 red second hand speedmasters.
I was recently given my father's speedmaster with red-orange second hands exactly as shown in a.json initial post. The watch was bought in an auction (Brussels-Belgium about 1966-67, for sure before 1969) so it is still possible that the hand was replaced/changed before that but it seems unlikely to me. Will post pictures later.