Lets see your Transitional 861 Speedmaster! - Page 6
Like Tree131Likes

Thread: Lets see your Transitional 861 Speedmaster!

Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 130
  1. #51
    Member T5aus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Phil in Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    88

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    Thanks Spacefruit, you started something here which makes for interesting reading, I never realised there were only 20,000 of these produced in 68/69 and that they had the fan tail second hand. Lets hope we get a few more examples
    cheers
    Phil

  2. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,038

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    Man I love this thread. There is nothing sexier than the Transitionals to me. What better reason to bump this thread up with some new pictures.







    T5aus, Andy K, gippo and 2 others like this.

  3. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    70

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    Great watches here guys! Just realized I never added my transitional to this thread!











    Andy K, gippo and Spacefruit like this.

  4. #54
    Member Spacefruit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Tropics
    Posts
    846

    Transitionalsl

    Re reading this i notice that there are two different chrono second hands, a fan tail and a square end.
    Can anyone confirm if both are correct fitment for a transitional?

    Here is a side by side of a -68, 27m serial Transitional and an "ordinary" -69 30m serial.
    (EDIT: To show the differences in a transitional and a standard.)

    Dont be too hard on the '69, it cost about $1600 which I think is too cheap.
    (Which is why it ended up with me.)

    Name:  PA040055.jpg
Views: 599
Size:  171.1 KB
    Last edited by Spacefruit; October 5th, 2013 at 19:57. Reason: Correct misleading picture caption
    flyinghell34 and gippo like this.

  5. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Leandro, CA
    Posts
    44

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    Nice catch. Maybe just different suppliers, different eras, swapped during a service? If these watches could talk. Serial numbers on these?

    All I know about early Speedy hands is that it seems they used the pointed hands from 1965 to December 1968, probably .321 only but I'm not sure.

    Cool seeing another transitional with a stepped dial and a painted logo. Seems the dot over 90 until July '69 is the last of the transition. With earlier transitionals having more parts left over from the .321. And not all '60s Speedies had the dot over 90. Hard to tell exactly when and how the transition ended.

    Long story short and because there are so many different variations, seems to me a transitional is an .861 with something leftover from the .321. Either the applied metal logo and/or dot over 90 bezel.

    I feel pretty good about my $1250 '68 transitional, even if the dial was replaced in the '80s and has a few miles on it. For the price of a reduced I got a pre-moon. I'm happy with that.


    A registry with serial numbers and all this data at a glance would be sweet. (
    I still can't believe the ~2,500 serial number overlap between the .321 and the .861.)

    Best regards,
    Adam
    Last edited by SpeedyAdam; October 5th, 2013 at 22:14. Reason: Removed comment stating transitionals are pre-Moon by default.

  6. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,038

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    Quote Originally Posted by Spacefruit View Post
    Re reading this i notice that there are two different chrono second hands, a fan tail and a square end.
    Can anyone confirm if both are correct fitment for a transitional?
    My favorite thread pops to the top again and Speedy Adam comes out of hiding to comment on Transitionals. It's a great Saturday morning.

    While not as well versed as Spacefruit and Adam in the Transitional watches this is where I choose to research, spend my time, and money. I have two '68's and from the appearance of them they both are completely different watches. Below are my two side by side and the one on the left I believe is one of the earliest at 2655369X.

    I absolutely disagree with many posters making the definitive statement that the 68's would never have the fantail chronograph hand. While my photo skills need work the patina on the older one matches perfectly and when held under the light both the hands and dial loose their luminous properties at the same rate. I work under the theory that Adam points out that these hands ended up on the Transitionals as they worked their way through the last of the 321 parts. I'm picturing a big box of hands and some old 321 hands thrown in and the luck of the draw determined how one watch got the fantail and not the other.

    Just for reference the '68 on the right is 2655531X.


  7. #57
    Member Spacefruit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Tropics
    Posts
    846

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    oops!
    My previous post was not captioned correctly. The photo was intended to highlight the difference between the transitional and standard.
    By way of an apology, here ARE two Trannies, 26m and 27m

    Name:  PA050005.jpg
Views: 569
Size:  144.5 KB
    gippo likes this.

  8. #58
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Leandro, CA
    Posts
    44

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    With that bezel and stepped dial on the -69, I'd consider it a transitional as it has leftover features from the .321 era. Maybe not as exciting as an AML but it counts in my book. And there were transitionals with original painted logos (serial numbers before serial numbers with AMLs).

    With stepped dials going into 1971, 32m, I'd consider them transitionals too. Seems over time, the leftover parts dwindled and were used in no particular order. We obsess over details; they were just selling watches.

    Are earlier transitionals (with the most .321 features) more desirable than later transitionals? Is a pre-Moon transitional more desirable than a post-Moon transitional? That's for the market to decide and time to tell.

    Cheers,
    Adam
    flyinghell34 likes this.

  9. #59
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    San Leandro, CA
    Posts
    44

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    An example of what I'm talking about. 1969, 27,719,397, 145.022-68 ST, stepped dial, painted logo, dot over 90, pointy chrono hand.

    Omega Speedmaster Pre Moon 145022 68 St Very Early 861 Model Stepped Dial | eBay

    Think it's original? I think the hands aren't but the rest is. Hell, maybe they are. Was the dial replaced at some point? Has quite a bit of patina though. I think dials and bezels in this condition were usually replaced during services over the years but luckily some survived like this one. The flaking paint surely worried most watchmakers and was a nice up-sale.

    Makes me wonder if my '80s painted dial replaced a flaky '60s painted dial, as AML dials are still available, unfortunately without tritium since the mid-'90s.

    Keep detailed records on your watches, especially from new. The story, and parts, may be worth a lot of money in 50 years.

    Name:  tran.png
Views: 531
Size:  241.0 KB

  10. #60
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    18

    Re: My 145.68 ser #26.5564** Dec 68 Transitional

    here is mine....








Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •