Hi Guys,

Just wondering whether or not to put in a bid for this. The seller states that the dial is 100% original and I wondered if anyone had a view.

Thanks,

Robert

 

Ask for an opinion on dials, and you’ll get them. This dial looks okay to me. Let's see what the experts say. As to whether you should consider bidding? The images alone hardly provide sufficient information to enable someone to offer meaningful advice. Price? Case material? Movement shot? A seller you feel you can trust? Return privileges?

 

Thanks, that’s pretty much what I thought but I was puzzled by the lack of bids on eBay.

 

And so, to misquote Jane Eyre’s, “Reader, I married him”, in this instance, Reader, I bought it and am hoping I haven’t paid another ‘noob’ tax after 1800 plus posts!

So, there’s the case back and movement photos. I was the only bidder and paid £400.

 

And, just to reiterate, I very much appreciate your input

 

It looks fine. if it needs a service, and it likely does, that wasn't a give away price, just OK. These don't make mega money even when mint. Note the gap between the dial and rehaut. That may mean the case clamps need looking at or at least the movement isn't pressing on the dial firmly enough. I had a 2577 with the same issue. nothing there seems amiss otherwise, the serial number is consistent with the iteration and dates to around 1950.

 

In my opinion, based on the additional photos which show (seems to me) to be a gold filled case, at £400, you did reasonably well. The case appears to have been buffed, but I am unable to see areas of brassing. There is not a gasket in the case, or on the case back. The watch should be serviced, and the gasket could be attended to at that time. Perhaps someone with a more critical eye might give a different opinion.

 

It is plated not filled. You can tell from the fact the backs of the lugs are gold and the 'lunette plaque' text in the caseback. Your comments apply equally well though.

It looks like a thick plate, 80 microns so can take a bit of polishing if necessary.

 

The case is very heavily worn. These areas are not shadows they are areas polished/worn down to the brass base. I could go on, but you should see my point. There is a reason they call it brassing.

Dial looks fine.

 

Thanks Guys,
I can live with it but, if I do decide to move it on, I shouldn’t be too much out of pocket.

It’s a style I like and, for a 70 year old antique, not too bad

 

Same watch, same dial, same caliber.

 

Not quite the same. That is the chronometer rated movement version. Same watch, different dial, different caliber (352 vs 351). Very nice too.

 

Very nice condition

 

As I know the only difference is the excenter regulator.

 

And the dial text and the movement number and adjustments text...

 

What about this?

 

Well, it’s arrived and, as is often the case, much nicer in real life than in the seller's photos.

What has surprised me is the way in which the gold painted numerals glitter in the sunlight.

Now giving it a test drive. Thanks again for the helpful comments and supportive pms.

 

Close but it is a later 2577 with the Seamaster text

 

So those numbers are actually mirror finish not painted which is why the catch the light. They are plated and part of the the dial surface not printed on top, done at the same time as the daggers which are integral to the dial on this one, not applied as on other dials.

Quite striking in the sunlight.

 

Thanks for this. The numbers looked so 'flat' in the seller’s photos that the condition of them was a real surprise.

My general preference is for indices rather than numbers, so I had no previous awareness of this practice or this type of dial. My only other Omega bumper has the standard (?) raised gold '12' and eleven indices.

Additionally, and I was grateful to you for pointing out the brassing, there is none - so it must just have been the lighting in the photos - although I was happy to buy it with your warnings in mind. The plating is 80 microns.