How to Assess an Omega Speedmaster 145.022-69

Sdílet
Vložit
  • čas přidán 24. 05. 2020
  • Looking for a 1969 Speedmaster?
    Here is everything (well nearly) that you need to know to get you off towards ownership of a good example.
    How to confirm it has the right parts, then how to judge the quality.
    Its a long video, full of information. Not everyone will agree with my ideas, and that is fine. Watch collecting is an arbitrary hobby where we explore our own fondness's and its important to trust what you like and what you find attractive.
    There are many fine people with deeper knowledge than me, who also have deeper actual research, where as I am observational. In particular I urge a new Speedmaster enthusiast to buy the MWO book.
    If you want to by the fantastic opener, it is made by my friend Paul and you can email him at Mr.Pahawi@gmail.com and he will sell you one.

Komentáře • 127

  • @ccw5886
    @ccw5886 Před rokem +3

    Thank you so much for this fabulous imparting of sound knowledge and wisdom. I have been a watch collector forever but never owned a Speedmaster. Strange really as at 62 I am the precise generation seduced by the Apollo era. I am going to buy a Soeedmaster , probably a 69 and just wanted to thank you for the great overview and guidance . As with all my purchases I can’t agree more that once you have gone through all the basic particulars you have to like it more each time you see it! If you don’t , walk away .

  • @wingman427
    @wingman427 Před 3 lety +3

    Learned a great deal about the Speedmaster 69. The way you showed and compared the different dials and cases is valuable information. Well done outstanding video.

  • @jonathansavage8221
    @jonathansavage8221 Před 4 lety +2

    Thanks for this (and other) videos William. I've really enjoyed watching, listening and learning.

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 4 lety +1

      Glad you enjoyed it!

    • @kaisoerfjord6794
      @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

      BEWARE, OMEGA PRODUCTION ERROR - All Speedmasters with cal.1861 or cal.1863 movement (manual wound) paired with 5th of a second markers on dial (seconds divided into 5 parts) or paired with 4th of a second markers, and all with cal.3220 movement (automatic) paired with 5th-second markers on dial, have INACCURATE READING of the chronograph hand due to NO FIT between dial-markers of fractions-of-a-second and the movement’s beat-frequency per second. Cal.1861/1863 beat at 6 vibrations per second (6VPS) and require a 3rd or 6th of a second per marker between the seconds; the cal.3220 beats at 8 VPS and require a half or a 4th or 8th of a second between the markers.
      This affects Speedmasters with reference no. 311.10.39.30; 311.33.42.30; 311.30.42.30.01; 3590.50; 3572.50 et cetera (if they have 5th of a second markers paired with a 6 BPS movement - cal.1861 or 1863); 311.30.42.30.03 (a 4th of a second per marker); and it affects Speedmasters with ref. no. 3510.50; 3510.12; 3520.50; 2598.80 etc. (if they have 5th of a second markers, i.e. each second divided into 5 fractions of a second, paired with a 6 beats per second movement - cal.3220 or 1151 etc.).
      Incidentally, those with ref. no. 311.32.40.30.01.005; 311.30.42.30.01.004; 311.33.40.30.02.001; percent 311.32.42.30.04.003; 522.30.42.30.04.001 (cal.1861); 311.30.42.30.99.002 (cal.1863); 3876.50.31 (cal.1866) that have a 1/3 of a second per marker (each second divided into 3 parts, i.e. 2 sub-markers between each marker of a full second), are correct.
      Even Tudor had the same production error/design flaw, on all their Valj.-based 28,800 BPH (8 BPS) movement equipped Heritage chronographs, having 4 dividers between each full second marker, making it a 5th of a second per marker, with a CHRONO-hand that jerks forward 6 times per second and always miss the first and the third quarter-second-marker). Only now do we see it corrected. And only now have we recently seen Omega NOT cheating in this regard, more than 50 years after they stopped making their 18,000 BPH (5 BPS) movement, cal.321. They even cheated NASA, in the 1960s, equipping the astronauts with a 6 jerks per second chronograph hand over a dial with only 5 fraction-of-a-second markers. How lame and criminal isn’t that ?
      Even their so-called 1957 reissue has a 21,600 BPH (6 BPS) movement paired with each second divided into 5 fractions on the dial. Right, a CURRENTLY ONGOING mass sale of factory error/design flaw equipped CRAP, useless for what it is marketed as, a precision instrument for accurate split second timing. Criminal.

  • @markusopel5773
    @markusopel5773 Před rokem

    Many, many thanks for your superb videos and your website, which have been an invaluable resource (I am sure for many others, as well).

  • @eddyvega4534
    @eddyvega4534 Před 3 lety +3

    I already watched all your videos. We need more!! Thanks for the informative videos.

    • @kaisoerfjord6794
      @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

      BEWARE, OMEGA PRODUCTION ERROR - All Speedmasters with cal.1861 or cal.1863 movement (manual wound) paired with 5th of a second markers on dial (seconds divided into 5 parts) or paired with 4th of a second markers, and all with cal.3220 movement (automatic) paired with 5th-second markers on dial, have INACCURATE READING of the chronograph hand due to NO FIT between dial-markers of fractions-of-a-second and the movement’s beat-frequency per second. Cal.1861/1863 beat at 6 vibrations per second (6VPS) and require a 3rd or 6th of a second per marker between the seconds; the cal.3220 beats at 8 VPS and require a half or a 4th or 8th of a second between the markers.
      This affects Speedmasters with reference no. 311.10.39.30; 311.33.42.30; 311.30.42.30.01; 3590.50; 3572.50 et cetera (if they have 5th of a second markers paired with a 6 BPS movement - cal.1861 or 1863); 311.30.42.30.03 (a 4th of a second per marker); and it affects Speedmasters with ref. no. 3510.50; 3510.12; 3520.50; 2598.80 etc. (if they have 5th of a second markers, i.e. each second divided into 5 fractions of a second, paired with a 6 beats per second movement - cal.3220 or 1151 etc.).
      Incidentally, those with ref. no. 311.32.40.30.01.005; 311.30.42.30.01.004; 311.33.40.30.02.001; percent 311.32.42.30.04.003; 522.30.42.30.04.001 (cal.1861); 311.30.42.30.99.002 (cal.1863); 3876.50.31 (cal.1866) that have a 1/3 of a second per marker (each second divided into 3 parts, i.e. 2 sub-markers between each marker of a full second), are correct.
      Even Tudor had the same production error/design flaw, on all their Valj.-based 28,800 BPH (8 BPS) movement equipped Heritage chronographs, having 4 dividers between each full second marker, making it a 5th of a second per marker, with a CHRONO-hand that jerks forward 6 times per second and always miss the first and the third quarter-second-marker). Only now do we see it corrected. And only now have we recently seen Omega NOT cheating in this regard, more than 50 years after they stopped making their 18,000 BPH (5 BPS) movement, cal.321. They even cheated NASA, in the 1960s, equipping the astronauts with a 6 jerks per second chronograph hand over a dial with only 5 fraction-of-a-second markers. How lame and criminal isn’t that ?
      Even their so-called 1957 reissue has a 21,600 BPH (6 BPS) movement paired with each second divided into 5 fractions on the dial. Right, a CURRENTLY ONGOING mass sale of factory error/design flaw equipped CRAP, useless for what it is marketed as, a precision instrument for accurate split second timing. Criminal.

  • @St_Lucifer_Morningstar
    @St_Lucifer_Morningstar Před 2 lety +1

    The James May of Speedmasters!
    Love your content mate!

  • @christianfloehr
    @christianfloehr Před 3 lety +1

    So informative. Thank you! Video is so nice and relaxed.. 👍🏻

  • @JHDC1959
    @JHDC1959 Před 4 lety +4

    Thank you William. Quality as always. I happily own one of your old 145.012-67’s. I really don’t mind the dings and chips, they’re like flaws that say something of its life out in the world rather than in a safe.

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety +2

      :) I hope you enjoy it! I do believe in wearing them all.

  • @cameronaach
    @cameronaach Před rokem

    Fantastic video; thank you for sharing your expertise!

  • @redhunterandgatherer2367

    Thank you, I feel a lot more confidant in assessing the Moonnwatch. Priceless.

  • @Indeed3545
    @Indeed3545 Před 2 lety +3

    9:40 It seems obvious when said aloud like this but it's great advice just in general. I've since managed to find the right watch that I've liked more each time I saw it.

  • @marcelodietrich8674
    @marcelodietrich8674 Před 3 lety +1

    Thank you for all your superb content!
    I'm hoping to soon acquire my first Speedmaster, and have an opportunity on this very iteration.
    This vid has proved invaluable for me, and my research.
    I truly appreciate your efforts.
    Thank you!

    • @kaisoerfjord6794
      @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

      BEWARE, OMEGA PRODUCTION ERROR - All Speedmasters with cal.1861 or cal.1863 movement (manual wound) paired with 5th of a second markers on dial (seconds divided into 5 parts) or paired with 4th of a second markers, and all with cal.3220 movement (automatic) paired with 5th-second markers on dial, have INACCURATE READING of the chronograph hand due to NO FIT between dial-markers of fractions-of-a-second and the movement’s beat-frequency per second. Cal.1861/1863 beat at 6 vibrations per second (6VPS) and require a 3rd or 6th of a second per marker between the seconds; the cal.3220 beats at 8 VPS and require a half or a 4th or 8th of a second between the markers.
      This affects Speedmasters with reference no. 311.10.39.30; 311.33.42.30; 311.30.42.30.01; 3590.50; 3572.50 et cetera (if they have 5th of a second markers paired with a 6 BPS movement - cal.1861 or 1863); 311.30.42.30.03 (a 4th of a second per marker); and it affects Speedmasters with ref. no. 3510.50; 3510.12; 3520.50; 2598.80 etc. (if they have 5th of a second markers, i.e. each second divided into 5 fractions of a second, paired with a 6 beats per second movement - cal.3220 or 1151 etc.).
      Incidentally, those with ref. no. 311.32.40.30.01.005; 311.30.42.30.01.004; 311.33.40.30.02.001; percent 311.32.42.30.04.003; 522.30.42.30.04.001 (cal.1861); 311.30.42.30.99.002 (cal.1863); 3876.50.31 (cal.1866) that have a 1/3 of a second per marker (each second divided into 3 parts, i.e. 2 sub-markers between each marker of a full second), are correct.
      Even Tudor had the same production error/design flaw, on all their Valj.-based 28,800 BPH (8 BPS) movement equipped Heritage chronographs, having 4 dividers between each full second marker, making it a 5th of a second per marker, with a CHRONO-hand that jerks forward 6 times per second and always miss the first and the third quarter-second-marker). Only now do we see it corrected. And only now have we recently seen Omega NOT cheating in this regard, more than 50 years after they stopped making their 18,000 BPH (5 BPS) movement, cal.321. They even cheated NASA, in the 1960s, equipping the astronauts with a 6 jerks per second chronograph hand over a dial with only 5 fraction-of-a-second markers. How lame and criminal isn’t that ?
      Even their so-called 1957 reissue has a 21,600 BPH (6 BPS) movement paired with each second divided into 5 fractions on the dial. Right, a CURRENTLY ONGOING mass sale of factory error/design flaw equipped CRAP, useless for what it is marketed as, a precision instrument for accurate split second timing. Criminal.

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety +1

      Best of luck!

  • @anthonysmithyman372
    @anthonysmithyman372 Před 4 lety +1

    Fantastic video, I own a 3570.50 from 2002, if I ever decide on a vintage speedy I'll certainly re-watch your videos!!

  • @vesper6910
    @vesper6910 Před 3 lety +4

    best channel of speedmaster

  • @j308s7
    @j308s7 Před 4 lety +1

    Very enjoyable and informative-many thanks.

  • @fscott1134
    @fscott1134 Před rokem

    I love a freshly, highly polished case. The more the better. No such thing as over polishing.

  • @Albinsson88
    @Albinsson88 Před 3 lety

    Watching this and your other videos for about the fifth time this month. My wife thinks I'm crazy but she also thinks your voice is soothing :)

    • @kaisoerfjord6794
      @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

      BEWARE, OMEGA PRODUCTION ERROR - All Speedmasters with cal.1861 or cal.1863 movement (manual wound) paired with 5th of a second markers on dial (seconds divided into 5 parts) or paired with 4th of a second markers, and all with cal.3220 movement (automatic) paired with 5th-second markers on dial, have INACCURATE READING of the chronograph hand due to NO FIT between dial-markers of fractions-of-a-second and the movement’s beat-frequency per second. Cal.1861/1863 beat at 6 vibrations per second (6VPS) and require a 3rd or 6th of a second per marker between the seconds; the cal.3220 beats at 8 VPS and require a half or a 4th or 8th of a second between the markers.
      This affects Speedmasters with reference no. 311.10.39.30; 311.33.42.30; 311.30.42.30.01; 3590.50; 3572.50 et cetera (if they have 5th of a second markers paired with a 6 BPS movement - cal.1861 or 1863); 311.30.42.30.03 (a 4th of a second per marker); and it affects Speedmasters with ref. no. 3510.50; 3510.12; 3520.50; 2598.80 etc. (if they have 5th of a second markers, i.e. each second divided into 5 fractions of a second, paired with a 6 beats per second movement - cal.3220 or 1151 etc.).
      Incidentally, those with ref. no. 311.32.40.30.01.005; 311.30.42.30.01.004; 311.33.40.30.02.001; percent 311.32.42.30.04.003; 522.30.42.30.04.001 (cal.1861); 311.30.42.30.99.002 (cal.1863); 3876.50.31 (cal.1866) that have a 1/3 of a second per marker (each second divided into 3 parts, i.e. 2 sub-markers between each marker of a full second), are correct.
      Even Tudor had the same production error/design flaw, on all their Valj.-based 28,800 BPH (8 BPS) movement equipped Heritage chronographs, having 4 dividers between each full second marker, making it a 5th of a second per marker, with a CHRONO-hand that jerks forward 6 times per second and always miss the first and the third quarter-second-marker). Only now do we see it corrected. And only now have we recently seen Omega NOT cheating in this regard, more than 50 years after they stopped making their 18,000 BPH (5 BPS) movement, cal.321. They even cheated NASA, in the 1960s, equipping the astronauts with a 6 jerks per second chronograph hand over a dial with only 5 fraction-of-a-second markers. How lame and criminal isn’t that ?
      Even their so-called 1957 reissue has a 21,600 BPH (6 BPS) movement paired with each second divided into 5 fractions on the dial. Right, a CURRENTLY ONGOING mass sale of factory error/design flaw equipped CRAP, useless for what it is marketed as, a precision instrument for accurate split second timing. Criminal.

  • @GabrielLeungJPG
    @GabrielLeungJPG Před rokem

    Good take on this, they do speak and mean a lot more

  • @1000lightyrs
    @1000lightyrs Před 4 lety +4

    Ok, you've made me understand why there are so many "Speedmaster only" collectors.

    • @kaisoerfjord6794
      @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

      BEWARE, OMEGA PRODUCTION ERROR - All Speedmasters with cal.1861 or cal.1863 movement (manual wound) paired with 5th of a second markers on dial (seconds divided into 5 parts) or paired with 4th of a second markers, and all with cal.3220 movement (automatic) paired with 5th-second markers on dial, have INACCURATE READING of the chronograph hand due to NO FIT between dial-markers of fractions-of-a-second and the movement’s beat-frequency per second. Cal.1861/1863 beat at 6 vibrations per second (6VPS) and require a 3rd or 6th of a second per marker between the seconds; the cal.3220 beats at 8 VPS and require a half or a 4th or 8th of a second between the markers.
      This affects Speedmasters with reference no. 311.10.39.30; 311.33.42.30; 311.30.42.30.01; 3590.50; 3572.50 et cetera (if they have 5th of a second markers paired with a 6 BPS movement - cal.1861 or 1863); 311.30.42.30.03 (a 4th of a second per marker); and it affects Speedmasters with ref. no. 3510.50; 3510.12; 3520.50; 2598.80 etc. (if they have 5th of a second markers, i.e. each second divided into 5 fractions of a second, paired with a 6 beats per second movement - cal.3220 or 1151 etc.).
      Incidentally, those with ref. no. 311.32.40.30.01.005; 311.30.42.30.01.004; 311.33.40.30.02.001; percent 311.32.42.30.04.003; 522.30.42.30.04.001 (cal.1861); 311.30.42.30.99.002 (cal.1863); 3876.50.31 (cal.1866) that have a 1/3 of a second per marker (each second divided into 3 parts, i.e. 2 sub-markers between each marker of a full second), are correct.
      Even Tudor had the same production error/design flaw, on all their Valj.-based 28,800 BPH (8 BPS) movement equipped Heritage chronographs, having 4 dividers between each full second marker, making it a 5th of a second per marker, with a CHRONO-hand that jerks forward 6 times per second and always miss the first and the third quarter-second-marker). Only now do we see it corrected. And only now have we recently seen Omega NOT cheating in this regard, more than 50 years after they stopped making their 18,000 BPH (5 BPS) movement, cal.321. They even cheated NASA, in the 1960s, equipping the astronauts with a 6 jerks per second chronograph hand over a dial with only 5 fraction-of-a-second markers. How lame and criminal isn’t that ?
      Even their so-called 1957 reissue has a 21,600 BPH (6 BPS) movement paired with each second divided into 5 fractions on the dial. Right, a CURRENTLY ONGOING mass sale of factory error/design flaw equipped CRAP, useless for what it is marketed as, a precision instrument for accurate split second timing. Criminal.

  • @Milofchg
    @Milofchg Před 4 lety +4

    How important are the hands. I notice some are dirty patina others look in good condition. With Speedmasters I always see uneven patina or obvious service hands with a patina dial. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I myself just bought a new Speedmaster a few months ago. I'm very happy with my Speedy. Best watch of all time.

  • @namor637
    @namor637 Před 6 měsíci

    Great contribution….thanks!

  • @SG-Photography
    @SG-Photography Před rokem

    Thank you for the wealth of information.. however, I was expecting you to explain the variations of the caseback too. I hope to see you making another video just about the caseback variations. Thanks

  • @davidcristea4581
    @davidcristea4581 Před 4 lety +1

    Amazing videos ! Thx william !

  • @chaosad4508
    @chaosad4508 Před 2 lety

    Amazing, thanks 👏👏

  • @martinjn2920
    @martinjn2920 Před 4 lety +1

    Enjoying this series, learning a lot about vintage Speedmasters, maybe I'll have a look and see if I can get a older relative to go with my 2019 vintage Speedy.

    • @kaisoerfjord6794
      @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

      BEWARE, OMEGA PRODUCTION ERROR - All Speedmasters with cal.1861 or cal.1863 movement (manual wound) paired with 5th of a second markers on dial (seconds divided into 5 parts) or paired with 4th of a second markers, and all with cal.3220 movement (automatic) paired with 5th-second markers on dial, have INACCURATE READING of the chronograph hand due to NO FIT between dial-markers of fractions-of-a-second and the movement’s beat-frequency per second. Cal.1861/1863 beat at 6 vibrations per second (6VPS) and require a 3rd or 6th of a second per marker between the seconds; the cal.3220 beats at 8 VPS and require a half or a 4th or 8th of a second between the markers.
      This affects Speedmasters with reference no. 311.10.39.30; 311.33.42.30; 311.30.42.30.01; 3590.50; 3572.50 et cetera (if they have 5th of a second markers paired with a 6 BPS movement - cal.1861 or 1863); 311.30.42.30.03 (a 4th of a second per marker); and it affects Speedmasters with ref. no. 3510.50; 3510.12; 3520.50; 2598.80 etc. (if they have 5th of a second markers, i.e. each second divided into 5 fractions of a second, paired with a 6 beats per second movement - cal.3220 or 1151 etc.).
      Incidentally, those with ref. no. 311.32.40.30.01.005; 311.30.42.30.01.004; 311.33.40.30.02.001; percent 311.32.42.30.04.003; 522.30.42.30.04.001 (cal.1861); 311.30.42.30.99.002 (cal.1863); 3876.50.31 (cal.1866) that have a 1/3 of a second per marker (each second divided into 3 parts, i.e. 2 sub-markers between each marker of a full second), are correct.
      Even Tudor had the same production error/design flaw, on all their Valj.-based 28,800 BPH (8 BPS) movement equipped Heritage chronographs, having 4 dividers between each full second marker, making it a 5th of a second per marker, with a CHRONO-hand that jerks forward 6 times per second and always miss the first and the third quarter-second-marker). Only now do we see it corrected. And only now have we recently seen Omega NOT cheating in this regard, more than 50 years after they stopped making their 18,000 BPH (5 BPS) movement, cal.321. They even cheated NASA, in the 1960s, equipping the astronauts with a 6 jerks per second chronograph hand over a dial with only 5 fraction-of-a-second markers. How lame and criminal isn’t that ?
      Even their so-called 1957 reissue has a 21,600 BPH (6 BPS) movement paired with each second divided into 5 fractions on the dial. Right, a CURRENTLY ONGOING mass sale of factory error/design flaw equipped CRAP, useless for what it is marketed as, a precision instrument for accurate split second timing. Criminal.

    • @martinjn2920
      @martinjn2920 Před 3 lety

      @@kaisoerfjord6794 Thanks for this info, not sure that it will stop me from buying another Speedie though as it is the design I like. If my timing needs to be that accurate I’d invest in a proper stopwatch. Great info though.

    • @kaisoerfjord6794
      @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

      Cheers. Read down and you’ll see I list a few that have correct markers. Remember the frequency must match the sub-second markers, and 21600 VPH = 6 VBS (per second), so a division into 4ths or 5ths is a mismatch, hence fraud. They must have a division into 3 or 6 parts of a second. Many of the automatics have 28800 VPH = 8 VBS, so they must have a sub-second division into 4 parts. Quite simple really, if you think about it a day or two. I plan to get the new reduced, 38mm, with column wheel.

  • @robynsjp
    @robynsjp Před rokem

    Nice, the 69 was one for my first pieces. Beautiful, beautiful patina, DON, extract - and even a totally incorrect 1971 "no nasa" caseback !!! There's probably a guy in South Africa with a 71 one wondering what that 69 caseback is on his watch 😄

  • @eddymagic1
    @eddymagic1 Před 2 lety

    Amazing content!

  • @livingdeadman17
    @livingdeadman17 Před 4 lety

    Subbed & commenting to help with CZcams's algorithm.
    Really insightful video, thanks a lot for making it. I would like to suggest using a Macro lens to shoot future closeups to help us see the details better. Cheers!

  • @javiermoncada4679
    @javiermoncada4679 Před 2 lety

    I’m looking at a 145.022-71, what is your recommendation to look at quality and determine if I’m paying a good price for it or not?

  • @footnfan
    @footnfan Před 2 lety

    Holy Cow, I own one if these!!! Now to be able to find the serial number!

  • @collector1946
    @collector1946 Před 3 lety

    Cracking video.. more please

  • @greencondoresq
    @greencondoresq Před rokem

    You had me at 69 model. Giggity.

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 5 měsíci

      That made me laugh. Just started family guy. Bit late to the party

  • @JBOsurf
    @JBOsurf Před 3 lety

    Outstanding content. Thank you. I am new to the notion of buying a Speedmaster and this has assisted me greatly. I would also love to see a video on the gold speedmasters. I have my eyes on two targets - a birth year 1970 145.022-69 as close to March 1 as possible (as evidenced by an Extract from the archives) and a 1992 gold speedmaster anniversary with display case back, on a strap (I'd love the bracelet but that is too rich for my blood!). A Tin Tin also has a lot of appeal. Thanks again.

  • @d.chimambadugha4864
    @d.chimambadugha4864 Před 8 měsíci

    Thanks for the information. I am looking for a good ’69.

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 8 měsíci

      Keep looking, prices are coming down, which is good

  • @stefanopics4718
    @stefanopics4718 Před 4 lety +1

    Amazing video. Where did you get those straps? Do you also know the value of a good step dial spare part?

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 4 lety +2

      My straps are hand made using leather I select/find often from unusual sources. A good stepped dial might be $600. An exceptional one will be around $1500. Your problem will be finding someone who will let it go. Most I see on the market are fair at best

    • @stefanopics4718
      @stefanopics4718 Před 4 lety

      William Speedmaster101 thanks very much William! Unfortunately not many step dials pop up on ebay or forums

  • @stephenbloughran
    @stephenbloughran Před 2 lety

    super video sir

  • @Dave062YT
    @Dave062YT Před 4 lety

    Great video 10/10

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 4 lety

      Glad you enjoyed it

    • @Dave062YT
      @Dave062YT Před 4 lety

      @@Speedmaster101 Btw isn't hippocampus a part of the brain?

  • @albertosacchi4663
    @albertosacchi4663 Před 10 měsíci

    Hi. Thank you for you video. What are the differences between 145.022-69 and 3590-50?

  • @namor637
    @namor637 Před 6 měsíci

    Are there 1971 watches with medallion case backs? If so did they always come with step dials?

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 6 měsíci

      Yes - all -71’s have step dials and medallion backs. Only a few are the “No NASA” backs, most have the commemorative engraving

  • @petemcginnis
    @petemcginnis Před 3 lety

    Thanks for spending a great deal of time to show us around the Speedmaster. I just purchased a brown dial 2011 311.32.42.30.13.001 on a leather strap which is my first Omega. I would love to own the flat link bracelet shown on the 69 but something much newer from Omega. Is there a modern flat link that Omega sells? If not, which aftermarket bracelet would you recommend?

    • @blackhawk1997oliver
      @blackhawk1997oliver Před 3 lety +1

      Take a look at the Forstner flat link, has the vintage look but with benefits such as the solid end links. Put it on my speedmaster and never wanted to take it off!

  • @narcisseaubel
    @narcisseaubel Před 4 lety

    Hello sir I have a question on a plane case back with no engravings at all 145022-77 my watch is a 1978.
    No steel away from hard polishing , very strange configuration .
    Do you have any idea?
    Does oméga in those years made some blank case backs?
    Can it be a manufacture failure?
    Special order?
    Thanks

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 4 lety

      Send me an email at william@speedmaster101.com with photos of inside case back, outside case back. And dial view. I will do my best to help

    • @narcisseaubel
      @narcisseaubel Před 4 lety

      Thank you sir , mail sent

  • @romeo6048
    @romeo6048 Před 3 lety +1

    Nice video. What are your thoughts on the new version for 2021?

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety +1

      Well a lot of money. Very few modern speedmasters have retained thier attraction to me. With the exception of the RAID speedmaster.

    • @asko7113
      @asko7113 Před 2 lety

      @@Speedmaster101 I’d have to agree. I owned a mid 2000’s, it scratched the itch but after looking at your videos and others I’ve fallen for these 69’s. Love the stepped dial, the aged tritium, scratches and all. So much more character 😘

  • @michaelbusuttil5913
    @michaelbusuttil5913 Před 3 lety

    Good day William I really enjoyed your professional video !I read the comments and found your email and just sent you an email
    Look forward to your professional advice about my Omega Speedmaster Professional

  • @mikebruegger8654
    @mikebruegger8654 Před rokem

    The 321 is the nicer column wheel movement, hence the price and its recent remanufacture.

  • @Tom.Biskup
    @Tom.Biskup Před 5 měsíci

    Wow, talking about quality content!

  • @spiegelburg
    @spiegelburg Před 3 lety

    Where is the brown color coming from? Was it originally brown or is it tropical discoloration?

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety

      Tropical discolouration due to environmental influence.

  • @christianfloehr
    @christianfloehr Před 3 lety +1

    Maybe you can do a video about the Ultraman? 😀

  • @MiloMoraes
    @MiloMoraes Před 4 lety +1

    What about the hands? Isn't this important to look for? Especially when they don't match the lume plots?

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 4 lety +2

      You are absolute right I failed to specifically go into the hands. I prefer when the hand lume does not match the plots.

    • @MiloMoraes
      @MiloMoraes Před 4 lety

      @@Speedmaster101 :). btw thank you for these videos!

  • @jonahpolley1367
    @jonahpolley1367 Před 4 lety

    Would you be interested in producing a similar deep dive on the 3590.50? They seem to be some of the most affordable Speedmasters that still have a tritium dial.

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 4 lety

      Well I would love too - but I do not own one! My interest is to 1978 but I do agree the later Tritium models are very attractive.

  • @steveallum8148
    @steveallum8148 Před 2 lety

    Great information thank you.
    Very interested in the case back opener, can you give me a contact for it please?
    Many thanks,
    Steve

  • @blanebutler6672
    @blanebutler6672 Před rokem

    Watching this while wearing my vintage 145022-69 Causes for to many video pauses.

  • @jamesparker6017
    @jamesparker6017 Před 3 lety

    Melbourne Beach Florida 🌴🇺🇸 Iam the proud owner of a Speedmaster my Parents gave me for graduation UofM in mid 1960's. Corrosion on bezel and sun fading dial. Bracelet stretched. Never opened.Should I have it refurbished ? Original box and paperwork. Purchased at Gordon Jeweler Coral Gables Florida 🌴 Its a keeper! 🏄 Enjoy your chanel.

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety

      No, not refurbished as that implies replacing parts and polishing. Just give it a service and enjoy it’s patina

  • @ThroatSore
    @ThroatSore Před 3 lety

    Doesn't like the them with dings but not polished either ? What is a seller to do?

  • @jefferysiu3881
    @jefferysiu3881 Před 4 lety

    How can you tell its a naturally tropical dial or a “oven baked” dial? Have you ever tried it before? Thanks

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety

      Mainly because no one has successfully baked a speedmaster dial! Many have tried but it is obvious to an experienced eye.

    • @jefferysiu3881
      @jefferysiu3881 Před 3 lety

      William Speedmaster101 i guess exposing under sunlight would eventually speed up the process of turning tropical

  • @lukasthomas8056
    @lukasthomas8056 Před 3 lety +1

    Wonderful video! Thank you so much! I have a question that somebody can maybe answer: I have a 71 Speedmaster I guess (with the moon info on the back) since many years and, alas, lost the bezel.... So I bought an aftermarket Bezel. I don't care so much about originality since it was and will be my personal watch forever and it's a very nice bezel even under the magnifying glass, but... it doesn't fit. Or better, it fits quite nicely but it's just that hundredth of a millimeter to large in order to be pressed on. So what the hell do I do? I can't just glue it on... Heat it up like was said in this video? Cheers!

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety +2

      Bezels need to be fitted by an experienced watchmaker. The bezel needs to be adjusted to fit in about 50 % of cases, it is not a DIY operation. If your watchmaker does not know how to do it find another watchmaker.

    • @lukasthomas8056
      @lukasthomas8056 Před 2 lety

      @@Speedmaster101 Thank you very much!

  • @srenbundgaard7388
    @srenbundgaard7388 Před 3 lety

    Thank you very much for this video, William - and thank you for your website while I am at it. I enjoyed every bit of this video although no mention of the hands and their possible replacement. I am in the market for my first ‘69 and I have a couple of questions that I hope you are willing to help me with. May I send you an email? Cheers //Søren, DK

  • @cedarcanoe
    @cedarcanoe Před 3 lety

    Can you do a similar video on the 105.012-65 please?

  • @omarcardoso8426
    @omarcardoso8426 Před 3 lety

    How important to the value is it to have box and papers ? I have been debating whether to purchase a 145.022 69st but em looking to purchase the 220 bezel. Most I have found dont come with full set. Would you buy even though it only comes with the watch ? Thanks for the hopeful reply will !

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 3 lety +1

      Box and papers are usually put together, unless you are buying from an original owner.
      I never let Box and papers infuence a purchase decision, condition and attraction of the watch comes first.

    • @bikeman123
      @bikeman123 Před 7 měsíci

      Box and papers add value but then you pay more for them. However they are easy to forge.

  • @jayroland9481
    @jayroland9481 Před 3 lety

    The "yellowish, creamy lume" you keep referring to is Tritium, hence the 'T' either side of 'Swiss Made'.

  • @classlessbozo317
    @classlessbozo317 Před 3 měsíci

    Do we need to worry about box and papers?

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před měsícem

      No - its all about condition. Original Omega Guarantees are great if they are correct, but some unscrupulous people will fill in blank papers. Condition is more important

  • @antonmarkov1635
    @antonmarkov1635 Před 2 lety

    I would love to own one but I can’t find any (of any year) worth around 2000

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před rokem +1

      I think the days of 2000 speedmasters are behind us.

  • @kadams842
    @kadams842 Před 4 lety

    You are doing God's work

  • @andrewblowers5898
    @andrewblowers5898 Před 3 lety

    321st like.
    Nice.

  • @tetyeelee2946
    @tetyeelee2946 Před rokem

    Ahh arrr ...arrr😂

  • @cedarcanoe
    @cedarcanoe Před 4 lety

    A 69 with a DON bezel? I thought 105.012 was the last ref to carry a DON bezel

    • @Speedmaster101
      @Speedmaster101  Před 4 lety +2

      The DO90 bezel was fitted up to 145.022-69 up to Serial 30596xxx

    • @cedarcanoe
      @cedarcanoe Před 4 lety

      William Speedmaster101 i have learned something new today. Thank you!

    • @FTube2000
      @FTube2000 Před 3 lety

      @@Speedmaster101 Thank You. 30596? This is new info to me. Big Congrats on the site and videos.

  • @phmwu7368
    @phmwu7368 Před 4 lety +1

    34:57 not even make $ 1000.00 on it... well the "nasty" annoying flippers of ST1 & ST2 will contradict you !

    • @cedarcanoe
      @cedarcanoe Před 4 lety +2

      Those are overrated imho, maybe a temporary thing

  • @kaisoerfjord6794
    @kaisoerfjord6794 Před 3 lety

    Omega’s frequency and subsecond marker MISMATCH is FRAUD. They use 6 and 8 Vibr/Second movements combined with 1/5th sec markers on the dial. The chronograph hand misses all sub-second markers on all of these speedmasters, cannot be stoppoed on any of these markers, for almost 60 years, and no one talks about it. DESIGN FRAUD for profit - well done.