1964 Omega Seamaster 30 with Extract Of The Archives

I purchased this watch last year as really wanted a vintage Seamaster to wear on dressier occasions when not wearing my SMPc, which is more for most days at work.

Important to me was to get an original, unadulterated version in great condition - no redials or suchlike. (Hopefully the experts on here are not about to disappoint me! I'd really love to know your thoughts, though.). I notice in the photos there are some smudges on the case from my greasy fingers, but the case is in stunning unpolished condition with no blemishes or damage to the steel.

The private seller I bought from had himself purchased it from Austin Kaye, but there was no provenance with it other than the ostrich strap was an Austin Kaye! So I decided to get an EOTA from Omega.

This post is similar to one I had previously made on the Christopher Ward Forum - but probably most of you aren't members over there, and as this is the Omega Forum and I have been asked by a member here to post some details here, I thought to add a new thread.

Some pictures of my watch, which I really love and try to wear at least once every couple of weeks:

Sadly, a 'Security Error' message pops up every time I try post the inside of the caseback but I can tell you that among other things it says the watch model is 135.007-63. This indicates a caseback from 1963, which is when I thought the watch was produced. Well, let's see...

For those who haven't purchased an EOTA, it's quite a wonderful thing. Details duly entered on the Omega site (I'm in the UK, I hear in the US it is not possible except through a boutique) and monies paid (120CHF, or about £97, EUR110 or US$125), I sat back and (im)patiently waited about 6 weeks.

Well it was worth the wait, and also a bit surprising in terms of what I learnt. Let's take you through the unpacking:

I'm holding the envelope (address hidden to protect the guilty). Inside, the letter is signed by the museum curator, Petros Protopapas.


Now let's turn to the extract itself. A beautiful card folder, sealed with wax embossed with the Omega logo


Now the exciting bit, the extract itself. All the info they have on my watch, and signed by the President and CEO of Omega to boot (yes, his actual signature - must be quite time-consuming to sign all the extract requests but a nice touch by Omega). Oh, yes I am enjoying a bottle of Corona Extra as I shot this photo, although not intended to be in shot.

So, looks like I have a genuine, authentic and original watch! Yeah! The calibre, movement and watch case ref all match their archives (otherwise, no extract and Omega give you your money back). But wait...my caseback says 63 - meaning the caseback was made in 1963. Yet my movement has a February 1964 production date. So this means my case was machined in 1963 but then sat around until the new year until the movement was produced - and presumably mated some time after February 26th. Not unusual when you think about it - but just shows that you can't assume exact years with almost any watch without archives to confirm exact production dates of the component parts.

And here is the little beauty laid alongside her archive extract certificate. Now I know her a little better, and I feel more 'connected' as a result when she sits on my wrist, beating away. A little piece of history, some years older than me but still stunning.


I hope that this was interesting to some of you! Please let me know what you think?

Thanks very much!

The cream-coloured dial and thin bezel makes it wear a little larger than the 34mm it is. Perfect for a dressy affair - who says you can't wear a Seamaster with a dinner jacket! My poor Nomos Orion Weiss doesn't get a look in these days...

The only thing I'd change is that there is a tiny fleck of something within the Omega symbol - not sure if the dial has lifted in that spot or if it is debris from elsewhere stuck there, but a gentle shake won't shift it and there's no way I'm touching the dial, which has a lovely patina of ultra-tiny 'pimples' (photos can't pick these up). It's due for a service in the next year or so, so I'll ask Omega to take a view on this when they receive it.

Nice watch! To me your dial is original.

I have the impression that some lume has come off the hands and has gone on the dial. You way want a watchmaker check that.

Thanks Francois and Jim.

Good point Francois, I hadn't considered that but in the absence of any other apparent damage, I think lume falling off is probably correct. I'm therefore wondering if maybe I should get it looked at sooner, in case it causes discolouration to the dial? Or just leave it? I'm not sure what tritium (and any other additives to the lume) does to a dial when applied directly?

Well, radium (maybe tritium here) spreading around is never good for dials and for movements. I am not sure the spots we can see on your dial are actually lume parts, but I guess it would be a good idea to have your watchmaker have a look.

I have nearly the same watch, have a look at my serial number