Posted by The calibre 1040 family came in either steel or 20 micron gold-plated steel. For the most part.
The gold-plated Yachting Chronograph 176.010 MD is the least common of the cal. 1040 watches. Actually, maybe the second least common.
There was only a single gold example of reference 176.007 BA made for Albert Piguet’s retirement gift. Or so I thought.
References to a 176.007 BA on earlier versions of the Omega Vintage Database were removed since Omega never actually made these for public consumption. Well, that was my take on it.
Earlier this year a purportedly gold 176.007 was put up for sale, but it was faked. At least that’s what I assumed.
Now there is another gold 007 for sale (as reader Vulffi has also pointed out!) and I’ve come to the realization that much of what I thought I knew about these watches is wrong. Omega must have made these, and they just aren’t well documented and likely were made in very few numbers. How few? I have updated my estimates by reference, and the single serial number I’ve seen on a solid gold 176.007 BA puts the current estimate at 145. The seller of one of the gold 007s cited a production of 50. That watch has its issues, but now I wonder if the seller knows something we don’t. So what do we know about these rare gold 007s? Let’s examine the few examples we’ve seen.
Albert Piguet’s Retirement Watch
We know very little about this one. We don’t know which dial is installed and there are no movement shots or photos of the inside of the caseback. It is on a strap. The outside of the caseback has no Omega logo, seahorse, or Seamaster text, but has a custom engraving. A tiny import hallmark maybe visible on the underside of the 5:00 lug. It has a reddish gold color.
The June 2017 Chrono24 Watch
I wrote about this one back in June. It is being sold by a private seller from Austria on Chrono24. It has dial C2, which is also frequently seen on gold-plated 176.007s. The movement is from the 3625XXXX batch. It is on a strap. The caseback inside has typical gold hallmarks, and the outside has a crude Seahorse engraving, Omega logo, and Seamaster text that I believe to be faked. This may well be an original gold caseback, but the engravings on the outside are not at all to Omega’s standards. I do not see any import hallmark on the lugs. The gold is a more yellowish color, but could that be a result of the lighting?
The October 2017 Chrono24 Watch
This one has dial A5, also a dial frequently seen on gold-plated 176.007s. It is being sold by a French dealer on Chrono24. There is no movement photo. It is on a strap. The caseback has typical gold hallmarks on the inside and is smooth with no visible engraving on the outside (perhaps intentionally to allow clients the option of custom engraving). There is a small import hallmark visible on the underside of the 5:00 lug. The color is slightly reddish, similar to Piguet’s watch.
About Those Hallmarks
The inside of the casebacks display three symbols only seen on precious metal watches. The majority of what I know about these three markings come from this fantastic page by David Boettcher. Read here for what is normally seen on the steel and gold-plated casebacks.
From left to right are three symbols. The first is a symbol called the Poinçon de Maître, which is a Swiss symbol that contains a number. The shape of the symbol signifies the region of Switzerland the case originates from and the material. For these watches, the shape is a “Marteau sans manche“, or a hammer without a handle, signifying a gold or platinum case made in Switzerland outside Geneva. The number is 183, corresponding to Nouvelle Piquerez SA, based in Bassecourt, which is just about an hour’s drive north of Biel/Bienne. Piquerez is the manufacturer of all the other 1040 cases in steel or gold-plated except for reference 176.005.
The second symbol reads “18C 0,750” and declares this as 18 karat gold, or 75% gold and 25% other alloys.
The third symbol, as I understand it, is the actual Swiss Hallmark. It is the profile portrait of Helvetia, the female national personification of Switzerland and she shows up on Swiss gold watches of at least 18k.
What Conclusions Can We Draw?
These examples raise nearly as many questions as they answer. Why does the color of the June example not match the color of the other two? What’s up with the amateur engraving on the June 007 and the smooth caseback of the October example? How many were made? Were these actually offered for sale by Omega or were they all special gifts like the one for Piguet? How much does a gold 007 weigh compared to the steel version?
In June, I had assumed that watch was a gold plated 176.007 MD with a fake caseback due to the poor quality of the engraving. There are no visual tells from the rest of the watch. I still cannot say for sure if that watch is the real deal, but the October example looks legit to me. The inner caseback looks correct based on images of other known Omega casebacks from gold watches, and the hallmarks match the October watch. And there has been other references to 176.007 BA in writing before, notably in the old language from the Omega Vintage Database. A close look at the text in A Journey Through Time shows that Richon never says that Piguet’s watch was a one-off, that is just the assumption that certain collectors (guilty!) have made due to the lack of other examples or evidence. It can be tough to decide when to follow the clues in those sources, since they are often wrong or unclear.
So for now I am changing my stance on those topics at the top of the post. I believe reference 176.007 can be found in three materials, and that the 18k gold version is the rarest of the 1040 family. I’ll be making a few edits throughout the site to reflect this.
Please let me know if you have any other information on solid gold 176.007s or any other solid gold 1040s that may be lurking out there.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article had the incorrect translation for Marteau sans manche, thanks to Lou P for pointing out my mistake.