Rare Or Fake? Gold 176.007 On Chrono24

I recently ran into a head-scratcher from a private seller in Austria.

The seller claims that the watch is an 18-karat solid gold 176.007, and one of only 50 pieces at that. The asking price is about what you might expect for a solid gold watch of that vintage, limited production, and size – nearly $10,000.

---

Gold 176.007s

There is precedence for a single solid gold cal. 1040 watch, and specifically for ref. 176.007. A Journey Through Time features the watch presented by Omega to Albert Piguet, the designer of legendary calibres including Omega’s famous 321, upon his retirement from Lemania in 1977. This watch is solid gold, described as a BA 176.0007, where BA denotes a 18k solid gold case. Piguet’s retirement watch has a gold caseback with a special engraving instead of the typical Seamaster Seahorse and Omega symbol.

There has been very little credible evidence of any other solid gold watches from the 1040 / 1041 family. They don’t appear in period catalogs, they weren’t featured in AJTT (not that AJTT is free from errors or omissions), and I’ve never seen a legitimate one discussed in an online forum or brought for sale. On the other hand the Omega Vintage Database formerly mentioned a solid gold variant. I’ve seen the following text pasted from the database into threads about ref. 176.007 multiple times, all prior to 2012:

International collection : 1972-1975 Swiss retail price (1972) : CHF 570.- Replaced former ref. ST 176.0001 Also available in 14K gold-plated with SS case back (MD 176.0007, CHF 615.-) and in 18K solid gold (BA 176.0007, CHF 2’330.-). Replaced former ref. 176.0001

Take that with a grain of salt, because like AJTT, the Omega database isn’t always reliable. The Omega Vintage Database doesn’t mention the gold-plated version anymore, let alone the solid gold version.

---

The Watch in Question

Many times, gold-plated watches are incorrectly described as solid gold, but the obvious tell is that the caseback of these watches are stainless steel while the rest of the case is gold-colored. This Chrono24 example, notably, has a gold caseback with the Seahorse and Omega logo. The inside of the caseback is also shown, with the expected gold hallmark stamps not seen on a standard steel case.

So what points toward this one being fake? Well, without getting into specifics let’s just say the Seahorse, logo, and text on the outside of the caseback do not appear to be up to Omega standards. Check out my guide to cal. 1040 casebacks for some comparisons (although those are all in steel). I admit the inside of the caseback looks somewhat convincing. The midcase looks like an average example of the very common MD 176.007, and its condition looks much more worn than the caseback.

If this is a fake/forged caseback on a gold-plated case, then there are a lot of additional questions: What is that caseback made of? If it is gold, is it an Omega part from a different watch? It seems like a lot of effort to fabricate or convert. If it is legit, why is the condition so clean? Has it been restored? Is it a service part?

I’m open to the possibility that Omega made a handful of solid gold watches powered by cal. 1040. Did they make 50 as this seller claims? I think we would have seen more at auction by now if so, but perhaps there have been a few sold along the way and I just missed them. As for this one, I’d be hesitant to buy without more documentation – specifically an Extract from Omega.

Please let me know of you have any additional information on gold 1040s.

---

UPDATE October 2017: Another gold 007 has come up for sale, and I have changed my stance on the legitimacy of ref. BA 176.007 in general, and possibly on this example in particular. I still don’t believe the engraving on the caseback of this one was done by Omega, but the inside of the caseback does look credible. More information here.