A friend asked my opinion on this the other day. I dated it to 1952 but the 13.2m serial number.
The case reference is C2577-6 SC and from the Chronometer dial, not so common.
He asked if it was rare. I would grateful for any opinions.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
That should say "by the ...serial number "Originally Posted by DWK
A friend asked my opinion on this the other day. I dated it to 1952 but the 13.2m serial number.
The case reference is C2577-6 SC and from the Chronometer dial, not so common.
He asked if it was rare. I would grateful for any opinions.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Looks like a redial to me but only the one picture to go on. What's the movement?
Probably a 351 or 354; see link: CK 2577.
Thanks. Defiantly a retail no I'm looking at a larger screen. The cross hair should cut through the text and logo.
The photos aren't great so it is hard to make a proper judgement but there were chronometer certified 2577s using the 352 bumper movement, if it is a 352 then I would say that watch is pretty straight, if not it's s a Franken or redial. I have 2 x 2577s using the 351 non certified movement. Nice watches for the era. Your estimate of 1952 sounds about right, these ran from 1948 to around 1954. The Omega Vintage database is only partially complete, a negative or different return doesn't mean a watch is wrong. There were literally dozens of variants using the 2577 case.
Last edited by Padders; 15th August 2017 at 22:04.
It's a 354...
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Then that is a problem as the movement doesn't match the dial description, the 354 isn't chronometer certified.
Apparently some were, see the link in :
If it was certified, "it will have the "Adjusted five (5) positions and temperatures" legend engraved on the rotor". There is an example show in the second photo in this Omega Forums thread: link.
There are no adjustment markings on that one meaning it isn't chronometer rated so I am content it is not a straight watch.
My apologies. I read your post as saying that no 354s were certified, rather than simply the one in the picture posted by the OP.
I was suggesting just that based on the Rafft page for the 354 but I am happy to accept that chronometer versions of the 354 were certified to replace the earlier 352 certified movements, just as the 351 was replaced by non certified 354s sometime in 1951/2. Normally Ranfft can be relied on but this is clearly an omission.
http://www.ranfft.de/cgi-bin/bidfun-...uswk&Omega_354
Regardless of that, the watch above isn't right.
Last edited by Padders; 16th August 2017 at 10:48.
Very interesting info, thanks gents. Clearly, all is not quite as it seems at first glance!
The watch is also engraved with a name and address in Mt Lawley (Perth, WA). The name does stack up with historical records for that address.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
