Forums Latest Members
  1. benc1855 Apr 23, 2014

    Posts
    49
    Likes
    137
    I found this watch this morning and have been trying to tease out as much information as I can on my own before posting (I feel bad about posting a lot recently), but I want to see what you guys think about my conclusions and the price. See ad:

    https://www.chrono24.com/en/omega/s...icnum=0&tab=pics&urlSubpath=/user/notepad.htm

    165.024 comes up as 1962 in the omega database and the 552 is appropriate. The serial number 24xxx puts it at couple years later than '62, but it's perfectly reasonable the two ended up together, although the 4 in the serial number is barely legible in the picture provided. Evidently the sword hour hand is also appropriate to the time period that the the serial number dates the watch. The dial seems original, the 6 and 9 are both open, and the bezel looks like it could be original. Only problem I saw was that the second hand does not appear to be the typical hand with the extra metal on the end (not sure what the style is called). Well, that and the fact that there's no pictures of the back or the ref number on the inside of the back.

    What do you guys think? I have a feeling the price is on the high end, I'm just looking for a discussion about it's condition so I can better discern on my own in the future.

    This is the guide I used to evaluate the watch: http://thatwatchandmore.blogspot.com/2013/03/buying-vintage-omega-seamaster-300.html
     
  2. shaun hk Fairy nuffer Apr 23, 2014

    Posts
    1,425
    Likes
    1,516
    I really like the dial on this one, though the lume on the hands does not seem to match. And you are right, I believe all SM300's should have the triangle on the end of the second hand.
     
  3. VictorAlpha Apr 24, 2014

    Posts
    105
    Likes
    40
    The crown looks a tad strange if you compare pic 1 and 4 it looks like the flatter Naiad crown but with a slightly more rounded profile. Where in pics 5 and 6 the crown looks more prominent like the screw-in crown. Maybe its just the angle or my eyes..
     
  4. kox Apr 24, 2014

    Posts
    561
    Likes
    2,562
    Here's one of mine to compare with. Mine has serial 24.7x and it's a straight 165.024 reference. Even though Omega states they started making the reference in 1962, I have never seen one from 62. Only 1963 references. Anyway, they made the reference all up to the end 60'ies.
    So this one is a correct 1965/66 as mine. Also have the same bezel type, so fine. The hands are in a sorry state and yes, the second hand is all wrong and so is the crown. And case looks polished. So yes, price is somewhat on the high side.

    IMAG0024.jpg
     
  5. benc1855 Apr 24, 2014

    Posts
    49
    Likes
    137
    That's a really nice example, definitely jealous.