# 1965 Omega Speedmaster Question



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

Does anyone know the model/cal. that was "flight qualified" in 1965?

I was born on 22nd March 1965 and wondered about getting an Speedmaster from that year, although I doubt I can afford it now, maybe when I'm 50.

I found this on the Omega site but it doesn't go into specifics.

"On 1st March 1965, OMEGA's Speedmaster chronograph was "flight-qualified by NASA for all manned space missions" as the only wristwatch to have withstood all of the U.S. space agency's severe tests under conditions of zero gravity and magnetic fields, extreme shocks, vibrations and temperatures ranging from -18 to +93 degrees Celsius. In the same month, the watch was for the first time worn officially on board the Gemini 3 mission."

Also, I know other watches where tested and only the Speedmaster met all NASA's stringent criteria, does anyone know what other watches?

Any help would be greatly appreciated as always.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## watchless (Jan 21, 2005)

Gary,

I cant help you with your questions but I just wanted to say that I think itÂ´s a nice idea! Getting that watch from the year of your birth!

From time to time I look for a pre moon from 64. (my year) and I must say that

you are lucky to be a year younger then me because the 1964 model have the straight lugs and costs "big time"









ItÂ´s a hell of a watch, I say go for it.

Good luck!


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

Thanks Jacob

It's something I've been toying with for a while now. I'm an fan of Omega's with 5 in my collection but somehow the Speedmaster has slipped me by, I probably thought it was too expensive for my budget. Now though I think by not buying lesser watches and saving up I can justify the expense.

Strangely enough it was looking for a watch for my 40th that got me into collecting. I'm also a motorsport fan and saw that Tag Heuer had produced a 40th anniversary reissue of the Carrera, knowing nothing about watches I set out to find one. I soon discoverd a Swiss company who could source one for a third of the RRP Â£1750, however it was too good to be true and having sent my money by wire transfer I received no reply. After a lot of threatening emails I eventually got my money back and the hunt was then on for an alternative. Nearly 2 years and 44 watches later I'm probably subconsciously still looking







.

Maybe you could get a 1964 Carerra, although I hate to think how much they fetch these days.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## Bareges (Aug 18, 2005)

Agent orange,

have you had a look at : http://home.xnet.com/~cmaddox/dimensions_selected_omega.html - very useful historical info

By accident more than judgement I picked up this in the late 60s early 70s










- probably not what you are looking at/for but secondhand value seems to be in the $1500 - 1800 area dependent on condition.

Hope this helps


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

Bareges said:


> Agent orange,
> 
> have you had a look at : http://home.xnet.com/~cmaddox/dimensions_selected_omega.html - very useful historical info
> 
> ...


Thanks Charles

Yes I've seen that site, CMaddox seems to be an authority on all things Speedmaster and I've been reading his posts avidly for the last few days. The model in your pic is the Lemania 5100 powered Speedmaster automatic, ref ST176.0012 dating from between 1974 and 1975, although confusingly I've seen them dated as late as 1983







. Now I wouldn't have been able to tell you that 3 days ago that's for sure. The internet it's a wonderful thing.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

The speedmaster watch was left inside the capsule after landing as a spare because they were short on watches and a Seiko was worn. The Seiko was the first watch worn on the moon.


----------



## rhaythorne (Jan 12, 2004)

Agent Orange said:



> Strangely enough it was looking for a watch for my 40th that got me into collecting. I'm also a motorsport fan and saw that Tag Heuer had produced a 40th anniversary reissue of the Carrera, knowing nothing about watches I set out to find one.


I'm a motorsport fan too and an old Heuer Carrera has been on my shortlist of watches to buy for a while now. I was in a London jewellers on Christmas Eve looking at a very nice manual wind example from the 1970's and was chatting to the proprietor abut how much these watches are in vogue right now and how much the price has risen in consequence. Unfortunately, from the buyer's point of view it doesn't look like the demand for these is going to diminish any time soon


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

cruiseboy said:


> The speedmaster watch was left inside the capsule after landing as a spare because they were short on watches and a Seiko was worn. The Seiko was the first watch worn on the moon.


Wow! .....

Controvertial


----------



## rhaythorne (Jan 12, 2004)

Actually it was a Poljot, the Russians got there first


----------



## Bareges (Aug 18, 2005)

Agent orange said:


> Bareges said:
> 
> 
> > Agent orange,
> ...


Gary,

Thank you for the information - obviously I must have bought mine in the 70s not 60s. It would get more wrist time if it wasn't so heavy and the lume was better...............by modern day standards the lume to my ageing eyes is rubbish - maybe Bry could help, I understand that he is Mr Lume!!-


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Pleae dont re-lume it!!!!










It looks great as it is....

You want lume, buy a Seiko...You want a great watch with history, wear your Speedmaster, all nice and original


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

cruiseboy said:


> The speedmaster watch was left inside the capsule after landing as a spare because they were short on watches and a Seiko was worn. The Seiko was the first watch worn on the moon.


Care to quantify that statement cruiseboy or are you just pulling my plonker?

My understanding is that Neil Armstrongs Speedmaster was left inside the landing craft as one of it's instruments was broken and the Omega served as a replacement. So Neil didn't wear any watch but Buzz Adrin did so the second man on the moon was wearing the Speedmaster. This decision also meant that if Buzz's watch was damaged they'd have at least one working chronograph.

No mention of Seiko in any of the reports I've read. In fact Seiko's weren't even on the shortlist of watches tested by NASA to my knowledge.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Im sure it was a wind up Gary..... 

Ive just double checked the back of my 'Pro and it deffo says 'First'


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

jasonm said:


> Im sure it was a wind up Gary.....


I did think it might have been (honest) but wasn't quite sure. Couldn't agree with you more about Charles not reluming his Speedy. Please don't do it Charles, I'll swap one of my monsters for your Speedy if you eyesight needs bright lume 







.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

Agent orange said:


> Care to quantify that statement cruiseboy or are you just pulling my plonker?
> 
> *My understanding is that Neil Armstrongs Speedmaster was left inside the landing craft *as one of it's instruments was broken and the Omega served as a replacement. So Neil didn't wear any watch but Buzz Adrin did so the second man on the moon was wearing the Speedmaster. This decision also meant that if Buzz's watch was damaged they'd have at least one working chronograph.
> 
> ...


As you correctly stated, Armstrongs Speedy was left inside the capsule due to an instrument malfunction but he was wearing a watch which was a Seiko that he'd bought as a personal back up. It was his own watch. Buzz Aldrin was indeed wearing his Speedy which, (and I'm sorry to break this to you), was the *second* watch worn on the moon.


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

You really need to back that statement up with some kind of reference Cruiseboy









Surly if it were true, Seiko would have shouted it loud and proud!

And I doubt if Armstrong would have been alowed to take his 'personal' watch on a mission, as it haddnt been approved for mission status, what if the glass had shattered and gone everywhere etc....


----------



## rhaythorne (Jan 12, 2004)

Jason said:



> Surly if it were true, Seiko would have shouted it loud and proud!
> 
> And I doubt if Armstrong would have been alowed to take his 'personal' watch on a mission, as it haddnt been approved for mission status, what if the glass had shattered and gone everywhere etc....


Definitely agree on the first part. Omega's moonwatch advertising campaign would have been shot down decades ago if there had been any real eveidence to the contrary.

Not so sure about the second comment though. Although I'd love an early Speedmaster in my collection, I'm really not terribly interested in the whole "first watch on the moon" thing and I'm not an Omega enthusiast so I haven't done a lot of research, but I do remember reading somewhere that various "personal" watches have been used on certain missions and I recall a reference to someone actually wearing a Waltham on the moon.


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

You are correct.

Astronauts took many personal items to the Moon, not just watches.

The Seiko issue came out much later - long after all the marketing hype had been set in place.

I think it was Buzz Aldrin that let it slip - but of course the official version of History will never back this up.


----------



## TikTok (Mar 26, 2006)

cruiseboy said:


> I think it was Buzz Aldrin that let it slip


Where and when did Buzz let this slip?

Seiko are very good watches and I have a lot of time for them but do you really think and astronaut

would be wearing such an average brand?

anyway I don't see any mention about Seikos here:

http://home.xnet.com/~cmaddox/moonmovement.html


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

TikTok said:


> do you really think and astronaut
> 
> would be wearing such an average brand?


Average Brand









I think you'll find that those looking for working tool watches put functionality above brand kudos - as I'm sure the American Vietnam vet's, for whome Seiko diver watches became almost standard issue, will testify too.


----------



## TikTok (Mar 26, 2006)

Yes I think an astronaut would put functionality above brand kudos.

Thats why they wore Omegas that had pased NASA tests.And I'm sure most would personally choose a brand that had proven itself around the world in all sorts of conditions ie Rolex,Omega,Brietling and others.

Seiko is a good brand but do you really see Buzz Aldrin down in the corner shop buying one,no matter how good they are?

What model Seiko were the U.S handing out as standard issue?I was under the impression that Hamilton was the most common issued watch.


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

What an incredibly snobbish thing to say.

So you don't think he would buy a Seiko because it would be beneath him









If you'd read my post properly you would have seen that I didn't claim that the Seiko divers were US Army issue, but that so many troops chose them they may as well have been.


----------



## rhaythorne (Jan 12, 2004)

cruiseboy said:



> So you don't think he would buy a Seiko because it would be beneath him


I could argue that, when he was on the moon, everything on earth was "beneath" him


----------



## TikTok (Mar 26, 2006)

Just show me were Buzz "let it slip" that he was wearing an Seiko

You have to remember these guys were world class celebrities.So yes I think Buzz might well have thought

a Seiko was beneath him.

I truly belive Seiko is a world class manufacturer.Just look at the spring drive.But Seiko has an image problem. How many people aspire to a Seiko? Snobbish or not thats a fact


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Ive never met an astronaut, but I bet they have/had huge egos, esp back in the day


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

TikTok said:


> I truly belive Seiko is a world class manufacturer.Just look at the spring drive.But Seiko has an image problem. How many people aspire to a Seiko? Snobbish or not thats a fact


Weak argument old boy.

I'm prepared to bet that Rolex is a much better known name than Omega and that more folk aspire to owning one - but does that mean the Rolex is better than the Omega ?


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Of course not, its the marketing hype that makes certain watches more desirable than another, Rolex and Omega do it better than Seiko, that is undeniable, many of Seikos watches are the equal or 'better' than some Swiss brands, but people at that price bracket dont buy watches, they buy the brand, and we have of course had this discussion many many times...


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

Doesn't always follow that people buy expensive items simply because they are wealthy or famous.

My Boss is a millionaire many times over and has properties all over the world.

He drives a clapped out Renault Clio and wears a Â£12.99 Casio.

I rest my case.


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

cruiseboy said:


> Doesn't always follow that people buy expensive items simply because they are wealthy or famous.


Nobody said that  And your right of course....Nobody here will disagree.

I dont think you had a case to rest


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

jasonm said:


> cruiseboy said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't always follow that people buy expensive items simply because they are wealthy or famous.
> ...


Erm-

TikTok Quote

"You have to remember these guys were world class celebrities.So yes I think Buzz might well have thought

a Seiko was beneath him".


----------



## TikTok (Mar 26, 2006)

Cruiseboy I belive you stated that a Seiko was worn on the Moon

All I ask for if proof.


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

I have already stated that the Omega was worn on the Moon, but that it was not the 1st watch to be worn on the Moon.

Believe what you want if you alway's accept the official version of history


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

It doesnt *allways* follow, but sometimes it does....TikTok diddnt state that that is fact, but in his opinion that it might be the case in this example


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

OK then

Proof from Tik-Tok that Buzz Aldrin has never purchased a Seiko


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

I heard it was a Snoopy Timex......


----------



## TikTok (Mar 26, 2006)

cruiseboy said:


> I have already stated that the Omega was worn on the Moon,


If you say so.(Don't see Seiko saying anything about it though)

This was (almost) fun.But I'm going out soon.So you have a happy new year.

But don't tell me version of history to belive,unless you can produce facts


----------



## cruiseboy (Dec 17, 2006)

TikTok said:


> cruiseboy said:
> 
> 
> > I have already stated that the Omega was worn on the Moon,
> ...


Ditto the above to quantify your assumption that Buzz Aldrin has never bought a Seiko.


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

Is it safe to come back in know? As much as enjoyed your verbal







it was getting a bit







and off the point so please







.

Thank you. Now back to my quest. I've discoverd through the excellent writings of Chuck Maddox and lots of help from you guys that the two models that were NASA approved for space flight in 1965 were the 105.003 and 105.012 both utilising the cal. 321. So my new questions are:

1. What is the difference between these two models and is there a preference for one over the other and

2. How much should I expect to pay for one of these examples?

In general, given the unique history of the Speedmaster, I'm surprised that the prices seem relatively affordable, especially when compared to a lot of other premium brands that have far less claim to fame. (Despite what cruiseboy might have us believe  )

So out to you guys, any help would be much appreciated and if anyone has an example they are willing to part with please get in touch.

Thanks for reading.

Gary


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Decent 321s are fetching Â£1500+ I think...

Tim ( Indenial) has one, its lovely, such a nice slow beat to it......

( Ignore Cruiseboy...Hes just trying to wind you /us up)


----------



## rhaythorne (Jan 12, 2004)

Yes, I think that's about right. I think the problem is that they've become something of an icon (a bit like the Heuer Carreras we were talking about on another thread somewhere) and thus the original watches are now just as expensive as their modern equivalents.


----------



## in_denial (Aug 3, 2005)

Hi there,

I do indeed have a pre-professional 321 Speedy, circa 1965. As Jason says, you can expect to pay upwards of Â£1500 for a decent one, then a few hundred for an STS or Omega (Bienne) service. More than Â£2000 unless it is immaculate and just serviced by Omega or STS would be pushing it.

I'd say that there isn't a huge price difference between the two styles, although (I think) the pre-pro is rarer. An original pre-pro bracelet will push the price up a couple of hundred.

I think people who collect Speedies tend to like most speedies, so neither is significantly more desirable, but both are rarer and more collectable than the post-321 models, i.e. the 1969-onwards 861 family.

The pros of the pre-pro:

Rarer.

No tacky 'professional' on dial (joke!).

Symmetrical case (if that's what you like)

Cons:

19mm lugs - unless you can find a '90s Omega Dynamic bracelet, you are stuck with buying straps, grinding the end links on a 1171, or one of the rare original flimsy ones.

Pros of the pro:

More 'wrist presence'

Easier to find spares.

Crown/pusher guards.

Asymmetric case (if that's what you like)

Iconic lug design

Cons:

Not a pre-pro.

Seriously, I'd be happy with either case design. The most important thing if you want that authentic 1965 look in a watch you will treasure is that the dial is in excellent condition, with nice ageing of the lume. You can't get replacement pre-pro cases, so its best if it is not too damaged (or over-polished, with all the edges rounded out).

You can find replacement hands if necessary for both, but only 'professional' badged replacement dials - but then you lose the '65 look.

Here's a picture (any excuse!) of a tidy 105.003










Hope this helps, and good luck!

-- Tim


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

jasonm said:


> ( Ignore Cruiseboy...Hes just trying to wind you /us up)


That hasn't been missed.  Maybe Takahashi might have some input on the Seiko on the moon issue?









Nice watch, by the way, Tim.


----------



## trym (Aug 26, 2005)

I just love when those "not the first watch on the moon" discussions comes up - as they allways do from time to time - whatever makes you tick man - is all OK with me!!

As if the true story of the Omega Speedy chosen by NASA wasn't a great enough story by itself for all of us watchfreaks.....So just you save up and get yourself a great Speedy watch with a lot of history to it...whatever people might say.


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

Jason - thanks for the info and the pointer to Tim and your right, I'm just going to ignore cruiseboy until he has somthing to say he can prove.

Tim - thanks for your reply and the extra information that's exactly the kind of detail that I needed. A lovely example you have there, do you have any more pictures you could send me or post on the forum. I think I prefer the 105.003 model like yours as the dial is less cluttered and I prefer the symmetry of the case, plus I think it would be more in sympathy with my birthday. All I need to do now is start saving and looking.

Coincidently an 1965 example sold on ebay yesterday for Â£1,850 it was in very good condition and had just been serviced the only negative was it wasn't on a bracelet. I was very tempted but think I need to learn a little more (and save a lot more) before I take the plunge. I also have reservations about spending that kind of money on ebay and would prefer to buy over a forum or from a dealer with an excellent reputation.

Thanks again and if anyone else has some information/experience of this vintage speedy please get in touch.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## Russ Cook (Feb 12, 2006)

The first Automatic Chronograph in space was a Seiko, Here is a picture of mine. This information was obtained from Chuck Maddox in a linked reply he gave on the Watchuseek Russian watch site.I am sorry i dont know how to post a link.If you wish to see, go to Watchuseek Russian Watch Forum.Type in Seiko, In the search for the Russian Forum.click on "Rodina or Sturmanskie first in space"and follow the argument! there is a link in one of Chucks replies.

I think it explains why prices for Seiko"Pepsis" have recently been going through the roof .



Regards,

Russ Cook.


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Hawkey will be pleased


----------



## TikTok (Mar 26, 2006)

Good luck with your search Agent Orange.It's a nice quest to be on.

Sorry about the hijack the other day.I Couldn't stop biting


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

TikTok said:


> Good luck with your search Agent Orange.It's a nice quest to be on.
> 
> Sorry about the hijack the other day.I Couldn't stop biting


No problem TikTok I've been there myself, it's difficult not too sometimes. It is good to see how much passion watches can evoke. Thanks for the luck I suspect I'll need all I can get and that goes for money too.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

OK a big 'thank you' to all those that have helped me so far, now I have another question. I've been told that "A Time Capsule: The Omega Speedmaster" by Kesaharu Imai is a particularly informative read, so naturally I'd like a copy. There's a copy currently on ebay but with a starting bid of $150 + $18 P&P to the UK. Is this a good price and is it worth it? And does anyone have a copy that they are willing to part with? A long shot I know but I thought I'd ask.

Many thanks

Gary


----------



## in_denial (Aug 3, 2005)

Agent orange said:


> ...
> 
> Tim - thanks for your reply and the extra information that's exactly the kind of detail that I needed. A lovely example you have there, do you have any more pictures you could send me or post on the forum. I think I prefer the 105.003 model like yours as the dial is less cluttered and I prefer the symmetry of the case, plus I think it would be more in sympathy with my birthday
> 
> ....


OK Gary,

I'll see what I can rustle up over the next day or so!

(and cheers, Stan!)

-- Tim


----------



## rhaythorne (Jan 12, 2004)

There's a copy located in Italy advertised on abebooks for Â£68. Not sure if it's in English or Japanese though


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

Its the Japanese one


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

Just a quick update re."A Time Capsule: The Omega Speedmaster" by Kesaharu Imai. I've managed to locate and buy and English language version. Hopefully it'll arrive next weekend or thereabouts.

Thanks again for all the info and I'm still on the lookout for a cal. 321 from 1965, so if anyone spots one FS on their travels please let me know.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

Agent orange said:


> Just a quick update re."A Time Capsule: The Omega Speedmaster" by Kesaharu Imai. I've managed to locate and buy and English language version. Hopefully it'll arrive next weekend or thereabouts.


Book arrived a few days ago and in common with all UK language editions the binding is useless. I knew this would be the case as the previous owner had been very honest about the condition. The Japanese version is bound much better apparently. Anyway today I took it to a local bookbinder, 2 hours later and hey presto, I can now open the book without all the pages shooting out all over the place. Result. Well worth the trouble and definitely worth Â£6 of anyone's money.

Thought I'd let all you English language version owners know.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## rhaythorne (Jan 12, 2004)

> a local bookbinder


A what??????









Anyway, congrats on getting the book


----------



## Agent orange (Feb 11, 2006)

rondeco said:


> Nice original Omega sales brochure with a pre professional speedmaster on the front on ebay , 320070166445 , ends soon.
> 
> Hope you've got deep pockets










I think I'll pass on that one, I was hoping to buy a Speedmaster for that kind of money 







.

Cheers

Gary


----------



## pg tips (May 16, 2003)

As my mates tell me I have very deep pockets but very short arms







and sometimes the 710 sews the pockets closed


----------



## Silver Hawk (Dec 2, 2003)

jasonm said:


> Hawkey will be pleased


Ooooh...yes, I am! I still have them and some lovely, original bracelets.









( bit slow in 2007...only just read this topic







)


----------



## Bladerunner (Jun 4, 2006)

rondeco said:


> Nice original Omega sales brochure with a pre professional speedmaster on the front on ebay , 320070166445 , ends soon.
> 
> Hope you've got deep pockets


Just looked; it went for US $241.50.


----------

