165.003 1966 Seamaster views sought

Posts
8,356
Likes
68,627
Hi Guys,

Just mulling over this one and would welcome any views on this dial.

Many thanks,

Robert

 
Posts
12,967
Likes
22,491
The dial looks original although it does have some ageing.
 
Posts
3,133
Likes
5,561
This dial isn't quite the same as my 165.003 below, which dates from 1965. Not the most close-up photo but the only one I have showing all the text and I think you can see enough. On mine, "OMEGA AUTOMATIC" is seriffed and the centre of the Ms dips all the way down. "Seamaster" is close but not quite there either: the first "a" in particular isn't quite the same, the crossbar of the "t" is shorter here, the second "s" and the "r" don't rise as high and the tail on the "r" is shorter. "Swiss Made" looks clumsy, and finally I am not seeing the sunburst finish I would expect. I know that dials were contracted out and there might be some slight variation, but too much looks wrong here. I say redial.

 
Posts
8,356
Likes
68,627
This dial isn't quite the same as my 165.003 below, which dates from 1965. Not the most close-up photo but the only one I have showing all the text and I think you can see enough. On mine, "OMEGA AUTOMATIC" is seriffed and the centre of the Ms dips all the way down. "Seamaster" is close but not quite there either: the first "a" in particular isn't quite the same, the crossbar of the "t" is shorter here, the second "s" and the "r" don't rise as high and the tail on the "r" is shorter. "Swiss Made" looks clumsy, and finally I am not seeing the sunburst finish I would expect. I know that dials were contracted out and there might be some slight variation, but too much looks wrong here. I say redial.

Thanks. That’s very helpful
 
Posts
8,356
Likes
68,627
Well, despite appreciating the advice, I decided to make an offer and it was accepted.

Three additional factors, that I didn’t post, effected my decision.

First, the helpful seller offers 14 days return, second, the 552 movement looks fine, and third, the watch buckle looked (and is original).

Having received it I’m satisfied that it is, as advertised, in original condition. The seller didn’t mention the signed (and I’m assuming) original crystal nor the signed original buckle. The case and crown are in very good condition too.

The centre pinion (?) and sweep second hand show what may be damage or discolouration but this is only visible under a jewellers glass or an enlarged photo. The dial seems commensurate with a 1966 watch.

The watch winds/runs well and seems accurate.

So, I now have a few days to decide whether or not I keep it or return it.
Edited:
 
Posts
1,113
Likes
7,821
There are sunburst dials as well as vertically brushed ones in References 165.001,165.
002 and 165.003 and their Brothers with date(166...}



llen

s as