| Informational Websites | ChronoMaddox -- the legacy of Chuck Maddox | OnTheDash -- vintage Heuer website | Zowie -- Omega information |
| Discussion Forums | ChronoMaddox Forum | Heuer Forum | Omega Forum |
| Counterfeit Watchers | ChronoTools Forum | ChronoTrader Forum |
|
|
The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998. | |||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Feel free to discuss pricing and specific dealers. But 'for sale' postings, commercial solicitation and ads are not allowed. Full archive of all messages is accessible through options in the Search and Preferences features. Privacy, policies and administrivia are covered in the Terms of Use.
| For the answer to the NUMBER #1 most frequently asked question here--for details or value of a specific older Omega watch you have--go to: Tell Me About My Omega. | Learn more about How To Include Photos and HTML In Your Postings. | To contact someone with a question not relevant to other readers of the forum, please click on their email address and contact them privately. |
: Hi Steve, I fully agree it was a clever solution for this mismatch of Mark monikers.
I also like the 'Mark 4.5' solution myself, as it clears the issue as actually the 176.0012 is neither a Mark IV nor V.
Also you get the point wholly by the fact that back in the 70's and 80's probably no one cared for such details.
Still I was rather disappointed when in a recent visit to an Omega boutique I found out that no later than in 2007 and from no less a source than Mr. Marco Richon of Omega in its wonderful book "Omegamania" the watch is yet again called (you guess?)...the Mark IV!
| Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE |