Community Stories

50's vintage Seamaster expert needed

T
Posts
2
Likes
0
Hi all,

I'm reaching out to see if I can get some advice from you guys about a vintage Omega Seamaster. I came across a Seamaster dated back to 1957/8 Seamaster. Manual wound cal 420.

The seller was stating the dial is original, unfinished. But I discussed this with a local vintage watch enthusiast. I was told that this watch is likely re-dialed because the front might not be period correct. Since the "S" is not "hanger" style.

Since I'm looking for a vintage Seamaster with everything original unpolished( ok with light polish). Should I stay away from this one? What's your thought if it is re-dialed?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you,

92dc1913218d64d9ab1a623ae19f6758.jpg
46f2e3fd314f877bc64f6a200d803ceb.jpg
e4f8769599661883a2a3a60a7b437757.jpg
7da7c95423443f194f732f379ed5a7c8.jpg
4b375afa1124f404f59ee79302a13b29.jpg
 
SkunkPrince
Posts
5,636
Likes
5,791
I believe you have a completely original service dial. These are dials supplied by Omega when they performed service on a watch. It might be the same as the dial it came with, but they are generally "close enough".

Beats the heck out of a crappy refinish, though! If the price agrees with you, I would buy it.
 
T
Posts
2
Likes
0
SkunkPrince SkunkPrince
I believe you have a completely original service dial. These are dials supplied by Omega when they performed service on a watch. It might be the same as the dial it came with, but they are generally "close enough".

Beats the heck out of a crappy refinish, though! If the price agrees with you, I would buy it.

Thank you for the input! What do you think the fair price would be on this?
 
Davidt
Posts
11,283
Likes
19,762
Although the coat hanger S is typical for this period, the wide bottomed S is also seen.

I believe this is original dial, not redialled or service dial.
 
padders
Posts
9,526
Likes
15,020
I too can’t see anything wrong there at all.
Edited:
 
wilderbeast
Posts
906
Likes
4,345
Watch looks good. One point of information: that’s a cal 410, I believe. Cal 420 is a centre second manual wind movement.
 
padders
Posts
9,526
Likes
15,020
wilderbeast wilderbeast
Watch looks good. One point of information: that’s a cal 410, I believe. Cal 420 is a centre second manual wind movement.
And indeed that is what is seen on the movement pic.
 
base615
Posts
1,024
Likes
3,994
Dial is fine, crown is incorrect and should be the clover crown but not a major issue.
 
MtV
Posts
3,181
Likes
12,506
padders padders
I too can’t see anything wrong there at all. Even the crown is correct for the model.

+1 regarding originality of the dial, but are you sure about the crown? This one looks like a generic replacement to me, no Omega logo whatsoever (edit: or has it been worn off completely)? I have seen a few of those bowler hat style crowns on them, even more with what looks like a clover crown with a few extra recesses. I do believe both are fine for the ref, just figured it’s a bit late for an unmarked crown. Happy to stand corrected though. 😀

Regarding price: Check eBay, use the advanced search for sold listings of that ref. It’s not uncommon and there are a few examples around. Those manually wound cal 410s and 420 go for less than their 501 or especially bumper siblings. 500-700$ sounds about right I’d say.
 
base615
Posts
1,024
Likes
3,994
You could be right and certainly happy to be incorrect but the Omega vintage DB shows clover:
upload_2022-1-1_22-7-46.png
 
padders
Posts
9,526
Likes
15,020
MtV MtV
+1 regarding originality of the dial, but are you sure about the crown? This one looks like a generic replacement to me, no Omega logo whatsoever (edit: or has it been worn off completely)? I have seen a few of those bowler hat style crowns on them, even more with what looks like a clover crown with a few extra recesses. I do believe both are fine for the ref, just figured it’s a bit late for an unmarked crown. Happy to stand corrected though. 😀

No you are right I’ve had second thoughts about the crown. I vaguely remembered that the clover type isn’t always seen here but I agree this one is dodgy. When I checked my similar 420 model this is what I found…,.


695356D0-5E2A-4A7A-A6A3-82736D6FA1C5.jpeg
 
MtV
Posts
3,181
Likes
12,506
base615 base615
You could be right and certainly happy to be incorrect but the Omega vintage DB shows clover:
upload_2022-1-1_22-7-46.png

Yeah, I’d think the clover crown isn’t incorrect, but rather uncommon on the ref. Haven’t seen many examples with it, by far the most common is the one @padders showed in the last picture. Here’s another one:
4630A4FA-97C0-4C12-8C11-364D5B0B6CB2.jpeg

It’s significantly harder to find than the clovers by the way, so if I had to replace one, I’d take a flat foot clover style. Also correct, much easier hunt.

By the way, @Taoism : If the price is good and this is the watch you want, a crown shouldn’t put you off. Replacing it is no big deal really.

And one more note: Sub-second examples demand a significant premium over center seconds. If you don’t care which one it is, the center second cal 420 examples can regularly be picked up for 400-450$ or so.
 
seekingseaquest
Posts
2,470
Likes
6,468
Most, if not all, of the untouched (e.g., unpolished, unserviced, hardly worn, etc.) examples of 2759/2761 refs I’ve seen have had the odd “almost clover” crown. I’m not surprised at all to see clover crowns on these as I imagine it was impossible for watchmakers to source the original one given it was only used on this one, relatively uncommon reference, whereas the clover was used on most Seamasters of the era. Same could be said for the bowler hat crowns given those were pretty common in the years before this watch was introduced.

I have no idea how to “prove” this, however, and as usual with Omega there probably is no correct answer but rather a “most correct” answer.

Here’s my old one by the way.
 
Claven2
Posts
349
Likes
227
That bowler is an omega crown. You can make out the logo being mostly worn off. It could be original or an early service replacement.
 
MtV
Posts
3,181
Likes
12,506
seekingseaquest seekingseaquest
Most, if not all, of the untouched (e.g., unpolished, unserviced, hardly worn, etc.) examples of 2759/2761 refs I’ve seen have had the odd “almost clover” crown. I’m not surprised at all to see clover crowns on these as I imagine it was impossible for watchmakers to source the original one given it was only used on this one

Agreed. There are a few unusual details about these refs, minute hands regularly protruding the minute markers being another one.

I have a rose gold flat foot example of those crowns. It’s not worth much, but it’s probably the rarest spare part I own, weirdly. 😁
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

samjames

Help me identity my latest 50's Vintage Omega Bumper Automatic

samjames Unique Watches & Complications
Dan S
Dan S
Posts
6
Views
3K
T

Vintage Seamaster Experts Needed

Trhatf Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
T
Trhatf
Posts
42
Views
4K
DIV

SOLD: 1963 Omega Seamaster 166.010 with crosshair dial and coat hanger S

DIV Private Watch Sales
DIV
DIV
Posts
8
Views
9K
gbesq

Calling On Our Vintage Seamaster Experts

gbesq Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
norb1967
norb1967
Posts
13
Views
3K
cristos71

Alpina Bumper Automatic - 1950's Vintage - Steel FB Case

cristos71 Private Watch Sales
cristos71
cristos71
Posts
6
Views
3K
C

HELP Verifying Dial on Vintage Omega Seamaster

CKnipp Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
SkunkPrince
SkunkPrince
Posts
16
Views
4K