Hey Everyone,

I was hoping I could rely on your expertise to answer a question that's been bothering me for some time. About a year ago, I purchased a Seamaster 166.010 / 168.024 from a Japan-based seller on Ebay. I didn't know too much about vintage watches at the time (still definitely a neophyte), but I did enough research to convince myself that the watch itself is real. It has a 564 Caliber movement with a 32XXXXXX serial number, which dates it to 1970. It also has the original signed crystal and a silver dial that has patina-ed to a nice champagne color. Though the case has clearly been polished, there are several digs in various place to show that it's seen some bumps and scrapes.

That brings me to the point of the post ... I'm sure the watch is authentic, but I have my doubts about the bracelet. I can't tell if its been polished or if it's just a new addition to an old watch. As you can see by the pictures below, the clasp states that it is a 1036-type bracelet with "11" end links. I've seen multiple iterations of this bracelet online, but I've never encountered one with a clasp marking exactly like mine. So, good people of the Omega forums - is this the kind of beads of rice bracelet that would have been found on a 1970 Seamaster 166.010? Is it authentic?

 

There are certainly more knowledgeable folks out there than me, but can say that some of my 1970's vintage pieces came on a similar BoR bracelet. Most were aftermarket and could be added by the dealer.

 

I have a few and the endlinks marked 11.

 

Authentic. No worries.

Tom

Edited to add: NICE WATCH!!

 

Very nice bracelet and watch

 

.

 

As your probably aware this case is dual reference. Yours being the chronometer (564) version is designated 168.024.

Nice looking watch btw, all looks correct.

 

Hi Shabbaz

Your bracelet clasp has No.12 (in a circle)
stamped on it whereas the OPs has 80 stamped on it. Does that indicate anything?

 

Good question! No idea! There are some bracelet connaisseurs on OF. Let's wait and see what they have to say.

 

I do recall an excellent thread dedicated to BOR bracelets last year. From my recollection of it your bracelet is authentic vintage by No.12 stamp and the shape of the omega symbol. Whereas the OPs is probably later (not vintage) by the 80 stamp and shape of the omega symbol.

I will try post the link for the BOR thread unless someone else can. Or we can wait for the bracelet experts

Here is my 1068 vintage BOR bracelet with clasp stamps.

 

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I believe I actually searched through that thread a while ago ... the fact that I didn't see any clasp markings like mine was the cause of my initial unease. Honestly, I don't care whether my bracelet is vintage or not, just as long as it's an Omega product. I would only be upset if it turned out to be some Chinese knock-off.

 

I think the number inside the circle is actually a "30." Not sure if that makes any difference.

 

The things to look out for fake BOR bracelets is un marked endlinks, shallow stamp marks on the clasp and more rigid(stiff) links.

Your bracelet has marked endlinks and the clasp stamping looks fine.

Examine the links - if they flow freely through the fingers its a genuine product.

Also examine the non beads of rice outer links.

According to Desmond's blog ( omega constellation collectors blogspot) - Accessories Part 2:

60s (ie vintage) BORs have outer links that are rectangular in shape with bevelling on the edges

Whereas more contemporary BORs have a more oval shape with much thinner bevelling.

Without seeing pics of the outer links I would say that your bracelet is genuine omega but probably not vintage.

Regards Neal

 

Thanks, Neal - I appreciate the thoroughness of your response.

The links definitely flow when the watch is picked up, there is no stiffness at all. The outer links are also oval in shape with a barely-rounded edge, meaning that this particular bracelet is not from the 1960s. Your posts confirm my initial thought that the bracelet is newer than the watch itself. Nonetheless, since all signs seem to indicate that the bracelet is authentic despite not being vintage, my mind is at ease.

 

I can't help but note that your bracelets are marked with "No. 12," which suggests that they are vintage ... yet they appear to have the oval-shaped endlinks, which are not from the 1960s. What year are those watches?

Also, I really like the cyclops window! Definitely gives the watch an interesting look.

 

Nice watches! Do you know what year they are? Also, what's the difference between watches that say "Swiss Made" and those that say " - Swiss Made - "?

 

I didn't realize this was such a collectible reference ... there are two posters with two!

 

App. 1970