# The Lil Mp 2801 That Could



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Something arrived from our Mr Roy today

I have to say I am impressed with the quality. Stems tight, hack set, solid lil buggers. Hard to photo, those domed crystal reflections, but oh that can easily be fixed 

Something to remember O&W as its heritage maybe 

Already the one with added wabi


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

My pictures are better than Roy's :tongue2:


----------



## PhilM (Nov 5, 2004)

There nice watches James, I used to have the auto version and was very impressed with it :yes:


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

I am on the "I hate auto's" kick


----------



## thunderbolt (May 19, 2007)

Very nice James. A lovely looking watch.


----------



## mach 0.0013137 (Jan 10, 2005)

Great watch but personally I prefer the version without the O&W logo :wink2:


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)




----------



## PhilM (Nov 5, 2004)

James said:


> I am on the "I hate auto's" kick


How can you not love this :blink:


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Oh I do, will restate, I am on the "I love manuals" kick


----------



## PhilM (Nov 5, 2004)

James said:


> Oh I do, will restate, I am on the "I love manuals" kick


You'll change


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

James said:


> Oh I do, will restate, I am on the "I love manuals" kick


Good man 

Manuals are the future....... 

I love the MP....


----------



## Rotundus (May 7, 2012)

mach 0.0013137 said:


> Great watch but personally I prefer the version without the O&W logo :wink2:


wot he said and 710 agrees. would need to upgrade the crystal to sapphire though, and a decent leather strap.

if i could find one like that i would own it. you dig.


----------



## Livius de Balzac (Oct 6, 2006)

Nice watch James!

I got my Ollech & Wajs MP2801 from Roy this summer, I sent my Breitling in for a full service and "needed" a watch in its absence, I felt that the MP was the right choice!

It's amazing that a watch of this quality only cost Â£99!


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Its my understanding the "T" dial qualifies it for Vintage Watch Sunday's. Correct me if I am mistaken.

Where's Mac when you need him lol 

Then I may tell you what I used to get the reflections off the pictures of the crystal, and no I have not changed the crystal yet! Helped to have my black portfolio right handy as the backdrop though


----------



## mattbeef (Jul 17, 2008)

The more i see these the more i want one as its so simple and plain


----------



## mach 0.0013137 (Jan 10, 2005)

James said:


> Its my understanding the "T" dial qualifies it for Vintage Watch Sunday's. Correct me if I am mistaken.
> 
> Where's Mac when you need him lol


Somebody actually needs me? :swoon:

As to your question, my personal view regarding suitability for Oldie Sunday is that a watch should have been made before 2000 :wink2:

I know & understand that others think it should be earlier eg pre-1970, but I feel that would be unfair to anyone who didn`t have something that old* 

* also it would exclude my wonderful early 1990s Omega SMP200


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

mach 0.0013137 said:


> James said:
> 
> 
> > Its my understanding the "T" dial qualifies it for Vintage Watch Sunday's. Correct me if I am mistaken.
> ...


I see, I see 

I have a feeling though these dials have been made before 2000. So that would qualify at least a part of it

So, it could be a closeup of the dial without the hands in the picture yes, since Oldie Sunday does not exclude a single part of a watch 

lol


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Interesting. Spun the back off. No plastic spacers. An O&W logo is engraved inside the caseback. And there are double gaskets one on the case, one in the case back. Cool 

And, the T of the seconds hand is same as the T of the dial but you need a couple beers to see that one


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Question please, in case Roy does not get back to me.

See the caseback its stamped 493. The other one is stamped 463. Maybe its a serial number, or maybe I have the 1 error piece with the 9 or 6 inverted. If its an error piece how much you wanna bet I have dinged the error piece bezel already?

I am damn curious about this number 493/463 thing


----------



## Livius de Balzac (Oct 6, 2006)

James said:


> Question please, in case Roy does not get back to me.
> 
> See the caseback its stamped 493. The other one is stamped 463. Maybe its a serial number, or maybe I have the 1 error piece with the 9 or 6 inverted. If its an error piece how much you wanna bet I have dinged the error piece bezel already?
> 
> I am damn curious about this number 493/463 thing


I don't know if the number on the caseback is a serial number, but on mine it's 488.


----------



## PhilM (Nov 5, 2004)

It's not the serial number, mine had 493 on the back also


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

hmmm


----------



## PhilM (Nov 5, 2004)

Actually I did ask Roy once about this, I'm pretty sure it was just an identification number, but for whom I don't know


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Hmmm 

Well I could see one for the logo piece, one for the non logo piece or one for tritium or non tritium. Both mine are the same piece though, so not sure. I did send Roy an e-mail!


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

It went in for an operation today!

My guy had a flat mineral in stock, but will wait for the sapphire, may be back to me Saturday.

But now he wants my spare he likes it, was surprised, waiting for Roy to supply me another now


----------



## steve309 (Jun 10, 2006)

Some nice peices there.


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

One came back today with a high quality sapphire in it using its original gasket. Dial looks a little sharper, now a little flatter and the dial and hands now look closer to you.

I actually ordered another from Roy, since the extra my watchmaker kept for himself all in trade but works out better for me!


----------



## Johnny M (Feb 16, 2007)

Nice one James. :thumbsup: I regret selling mine (older version) and am thinking of getting this one. How have you found the lume?


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Hi 

The hands lume starts off brighter but the dial lume is what is lasting come early morning. the hands lume charges the dial lume does not. But that is to be expected with the tritium dial and I find is part of the attraction, the tritium dial. The dial still has a bit of life in it

Come next Old Watch Sunday, since I have confirmed re the dial, I can actually post a dial close up only and slip under for the Sunday guidelines, but cannot post the rest of the watch :lol:

...............


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

As stated its with flat sapphire now.

The first pics, using the one where I did not block the reflections with a black background you can see the reflections I missed on the dome crystal of the one piece.










In my revised photos with sapphire although not actually as good of pics there is no blocking of reflections just the watch is angled


----------



## Johnny M (Feb 16, 2007)

Thanks for that James, shall look forward to the pics.


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

Its my understanding they may be out of them but will have again next year but not with the tritium dials, will be luminova


----------



## Stinch (Jul 9, 2008)

James said:


> As stated its with flat sapphire now.
> 
> The first pics, using the one where I did not block the reflections with a black background you can see the reflections I missed on the dome crystal of the one piece.
> 
> ...


James

Looking at your photos the watch looked great & the hands have black outlines/edges as apposed to the silver on Roys sales site. Just what I wanted!

Unfortuanately when I tried to order one the same Roy told me they are silver but just look black in the photos!!

Cheers Roger


----------



## Stinch (Jul 9, 2008)

James

Just to clarify. My last reply was not criticising your photos. I was just amazed when Roy told me that the hands were not actually black.

Regards Roger


----------



## James (Jul 17, 2006)

In the first photos I used a background to get rid of crystal reflections. In the last photos I used nothing other than an angle where there would be no reflections. Really depends on the angle, needing light to reflect off the hands in the correct angle to show silver. On wrist it works the same!


----------

