1000 Series - Make it Make Sense!

Aquagraph
Posts
23,583
Likes
34,111
Screenshot 2025-09-09 110058.webp


I'm finally coming around to starting the history of the 1000 Series, and I feel obliged to do what I did with the 2000 and 3000 series and go back into the Heuer catalogues, but I'm quickly rethinking that.
This page makes no sense. First of all, it seems there's no mention of 1000 series in this catalogue... which okay, not a big deal. But then supposedly #4 is THE SAME as #2 but with an 'integrated' bracelet. But also a calendar and a completely different case with a steel bezel and a crown at 4 that no one is going to think of as a 1000. Even though the part number clearly makes it a 1000.
Ugh.
Maybe I go back to my original plan and start with the TAG Heuer models
 
Thehighwayman
Posts
482
Likes
872
馃榿 I think by "the same" they are indicating the matching specs like screw crown and rotating bezel rather than the watch itself.

The 980.003/4 are interesting watches and quite scarce. They are basically the same watch as a Sinn 809,some say they were put together by Sinn.

Without the 1000 there may not have been a company for TAG to take over. I think a history has to include the Heuer models just on that basis even if it's painful! 馃槀
 
dtf
Posts
3,034
Likes
3,139
I think they were pretty much throwing sh*t at the wall and watching to see what stuck by this point in the quartz crisis.
 
Aquagraph
Posts
23,583
Likes
34,111
Thehighwayman Thehighwayman
馃榿 I think by "the same" they are indicating the matching specs like screw crown and rotating bezel rather than the watch itself.

The 980.003/4 are interesting watches and quite scarce. They are basically the same watch as a Sinn 809,some say they were put together by Sinn.

Without the 1000 there may not have been a company for TAG to take over. I think a history has to include the Heuer models just on that basis even if it's painful! 馃槀
I agree. Just doing the TAG models would be ridiculous, so I'm doing it. But I'm not including the Calculator, the Autavia or the Pilot as 1000 models or the bloody chronographs no matter what the 1984 catalogue says!
 
Thehighwayman
Posts
482
Likes
872
Aquagraph Aquagraph
I agree. Just doing the TAG models would be ridiculous, so I'm doing it. But I'm not including the Calculator, the Autavia or the Pilot as 1000 models or the bloody chronographs no matter what the 1984 catalogue says!
馃憤 No, I wouldn't be putting any chrono's in there personally. The 980.003/4 I'd class as a "quirky" 1000.Those little PVD ladies watches fall into the same category for me.
I like the cases on those, like a mini Pasadena.
 
Mspeedster
Posts
9,418
Likes
19,283
Aquagraph Aquagraph
Screenshot 2025-09-09 110058.webp



This page makes no sense. First of all, it seems there's no mention of 1000 series in this catalogue... which okay, not a big deal. But then supposedly #4 is THE SAME as #2 but with an 'integrated' bracelet. But also a calendar and a completely different case with a steel bezel and a crown at 4 that no one is going to think of as a 1000. Even though the part number clearly makes it a 1000.
In the early days, Heuer just referred to these as their Dive Watches. Then in around 1984 they came up with 1000 as a category name and stuck a whole bunch of watches under this grouping. Including some watches that are no longer perceived as being 1000s in the classic sense, e.g. the chronographs listed. So, I understand your dilemma, it's tough deciding when Heuer and then TAG Heuer evolved their definition of what was and is a 1000.

Perhaps the way to do it is not state the early '79-'83 watches as 1000s, as Heuer didn't call them 1000s then. Just refer to them as early dive watches that were the foundation for the 1000.

Another suggestion would be to review from some other sources. DC (@Calibre11) had a good article on the history of the 1000, which I believe was leveraged in TAG Heuer's 1000 history page:
https://www.tagheuer.com/us/en/vintage-collection/tag-heuer-1000-series.html
Also, I found this OTD article by @Jeff Stein to be a good resource.
https://www.onthedash.com/tag-heuer-dive-watches-oldest-and-newest/
 
Mspeedster
Posts
9,418
Likes
19,283
Aquagraph Aquagraph
The Regatta models... not 1000s, right?
That's a good question. It is listed as a 1000 dive watch, not a chronograph, in the '84-'86 catalogues. However, I've always thought of the Regatta as its own model. If my perception is in line with the masses, then probably not perceived as a 1000 to most.
 
Mspeedster
Posts
9,418
Likes
19,283
While the 980.004 is perhaps not considered a 1000 by today's viewpoint, back in 1982 it was definitely part of Heuer's core dive watch collection. This is from a '82 Heuer Diving Watches Brochure.
1982DivingP04.webp


Having said that, I think the 1987 TAG Heuer catalogue captures what I consider to be the core 1000 line. If cross referencing back to the earlier Heuer catalogues, those earlier variants are the ones I'd connect the dots to. Which doesn't include the 980.004.
 
Mspeedster
Posts
9,418
Likes
19,283
This guy actually saved DC's old Calibre11 article and made into a video. You can also read through most of the original text on the video as well.

It also shows that in the mid '80s (from around '84) is when 1000 was added to the dial on some of the watches. The catalogues reuse many of the older pics and don't show the various subtle dial differences across the years.
 
Thehighwayman
Posts
482
Likes
872
Mspeedster Mspeedster
While the 980.004 is perhaps not considered a 1000 by today's viewpoint, back in 1982 it was definitely part of Heuer's core dive watch collection. This is from a '82 Heuer Diving Watches Brochure.
1982DivingP04.webp


Having said that, I think the 1987 TAG Heuer catalogue captures what I consider to be the core 1000 line. If cross referencing back to the earlier Heuer catalogues, those earlier variants are the ones I'd connect the dots to. Which doesn't include the 980.004.
Yes,it's pragmatic to only link the recognisable direct descendants for a TH article.
The 980.004 has a few variations on it's own,no direct link to subsequent TH 1000's and you have to draw the line somewhere I guess !
I do think of them as an early 1000 but I'm probably in a small minority.
 
Aquagraph
Posts
23,583
Likes
34,111
Mspeedster Mspeedster
In the early days, Heuer just referred to these as their Dive Watches. Then in around 1984 they came up with 1000 as a category name and stuck a whole bunch of watches under this grouping. Including some watches that are no longer perceived as being 1000s in the classic sense, e.g. the chronographs listed. So, I understand your dilemma, it's tough deciding when Heuer and then TAG Heuer evolved their definition of what was and is a 1000.

Perhaps the way to do it is not state the early '79-'83 watches as 1000s, as Heuer didn't call them 1000s then. Just refer to them as early dive watches that were the foundation for the 1000.

Another suggestion would be to review from some other sources. DC (@Calibre11) had a good article on the history of the 1000, which I believe was leveraged in TAG Heuer's 1000 history page:
https://www.tagheuer.com/us/en/vintage-collection/tag-heuer-1000-series.html
Also, I found this OTD article by @Jeff Stein to be a good resource.
https://www.onthedash.com/tag-heuer-dive-watches-oldest-and-newest/
Thanks Michael, I kinda like the idea of starting with 'Dive' watches and progressing on to what we now call the 1000 Series. I don't think the Regatta should be a 1000 either. Those little ladies watches are a confusion, especially since they seem to be numbered as 1000s.
 
Mspeedster
Posts
9,418
Likes
19,283
Aquagraph Aquagraph
Thanks Michael, I kinda like the idea of starting with 'Dive' watches and progressing on to what we now call the 1000 Series. I don't think the Regatta should be a 1000 either. Those little ladies watches are a confusion, especially since they seem to be numbered as 1000s.
The Regatta can trace its roots to the Heuer Aquastar Regate from the '60s and fits more with Heuer's Yaghting themed catagory than a 1000 Diver (IMHO).

I tend to agree with @Thehighwayman about those weird ladies 1000s, they're like a quirky 1000 line that was rather short lived. Unless I missed them in earlier catalogues, seems they were first introduced as 1000s in the '84 catalogue and don't seem to appear in later catalogues. But I'd include them for completeness, as they can't really be classified as anything else can they?
 
Sign up or log in to reply...