Forums Latest Members
  1. benc1855 Apr 21, 2014

    Posts
    49
    Likes
    137
    Would you guys mind commenting on the collectibility of Seamaster 120s from the 60s and 70s? From looking around, I get the sense that the Seamaster 300 is more valuable, but I like the look of the 120 (and price-point) much more.

    I originally started my search looking at 1960s Seamaster Automatics (like the one I posted yesterday) and Constellations because of the lower price-point paired with very attractive aesthetics. These watches also seem to be the topic of a lot of the discussion on these forums, which I think speaks to their collectibility, not so much the 120. I'm young, I don't have the means to collect in earnest, but am interested in buying a to commemorate an upcoming milestone. I hope I am able to hold on to the watch, but nonetheless would prefer to buy a watch that will hold it's value and maintain the interest of collectors. Will the 120 meet those criteria (specifically the 166.027) if I find one in good shape/am willing to accept spending more?

    Additional noob question: Why is this listed as 166.0027 in the Omega vintage database? I try to look up every watch I consider in the database but clearly do not understand how the reference numbers work, as I only get a match 30-40% of the time (I must have read their directions 30 times now). Can someone please enlighten me? My apologies if the answer is obvious. Thanks again for the advice.
     
  2. X350 XJR Vintage Omega Aficionado Apr 22, 2014

    Posts
    12,430
    Likes
    29,484
    The Omega database is full of holes not only regarding references listed but also the information for any given reference. Lots of missing and incorrect information can be found there. Some things like needing to include an additional digit when looking up a reference simply have no explanation, just one of the mysteries of the database.

    The 166.027 would be a good choice for a starter especially if you prefer the looks anyway. I can't imagine these ever going down in value at this point or any other Omega from the same period for that matter.

    Buy the best one you can afford. Absolutely don't buy one with a missing bezel, they are virtually impossible to find, long NLA from Omega and other vintage parts sources.

    Feel free to post any candidates here on the forum for vetting before making a purchase, whatever one(s) you decide to go after.
     
    dragoman likes this.
  3. benc1855 Apr 22, 2014

    Posts
    49
    Likes
    137
    I realized on a second read that this was a bit of a roundabout post. I understand the 300 is more collectible and that the Deep Blue 120 is collectible than standard 120s. Any opinions and input on standard 120s would be appreciated.

    In regards to the second question, I am still able to track down the ref numbers, I'm just curious as to why there is sometimes an extra zero added, and if there's a rule of sorts as to when you may need to do that. Thanks again!
     
  4. benc1855 Apr 22, 2014

    Posts
    49
    Likes
    137

    Looks like I posted my follow-up just as you posted your response. Thank you very much for the advice, that's exactly what I was looking for. Any other contributions would be welcome as well.
     
  5. Hijak Apr 22, 2014

    Posts
    7,225
    Likes
    24,337
    I think Norman (X350 XJR) answered your questions...but I will emphasis that the condition of a vintage watch is very import when it comes to value. If you want a watch that, as you say "will hold its value," then heed the above advice and buy the best one you are able to! A better condition vintage piece will not only hold its value but will be much easier (faster) to sell when the time comes. And as far as one watch model being worth more than another, don't pay too much attention to this type of thing, go with what you like and you'll be much happier in the end.
     
  6. Archer Omega Qualified Watchmaker Apr 22, 2014

    Posts
    26,343
    Likes
    65,053
    It's not really a mystery, it's just the numbering system Omega uses today has the case reference ending with 7 numbers, so the database is likely structured to accommodate that. I suspect the database pulls some information from the same place the Omega Extranet does, so I have to add that extra zero when I look up older case numbers on the Extranet as well.

    And keep in mind the 6 or 7 digit number you guys always use is only part of the full case reference. There is a prefix of 055 indicating it is a case part number that follows, then a 2 digit code for the case material (letters), and then the 7 digits for the case.

    So your 1660027 partial case reference is actually a 055ST1660027.

    Cheers, Al