- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 6
Bentobox
·
Serial number of the movement is 37,xxx,xxx which places production at 1973. It's a movement 1012.
A few questions on Seamaster Baby Ploprof 166.0250
Serial number of the movement is 37,xxx,xxx which places production at 1973. It's a movement 1012.
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 6
Bentobox
·Thanks so much for these thoughtful replies. From the discussion, I can ascertain the following...
1. It is possible for Omega Baby PloProf 166.0250 to have 1973 production year and caliber 1012 movement.
2. I have a service dial, as the top indice is solid.
3. It's underdetermined that I have a Watchco Frankenstein. This may be an original Omega, with the service dial.
Let me know if I'm off on any of the above. Also here are a few more photos of the case and dial as some have asked.
When I look for Chrono24 and other listings, none of the Omega Baby PloProf are listed as Watchco's. What would a typical market value be for a Watchco version, if an original Omega is about US$4K to $6K today?
Why does it seem like there is a clear plastic layer over the markings on the bezel? I cannot see it visually with a loupe, only by touch and feel that it's smooth. The markings on the bezel do not seem exposed to the environment, yet they have patina'd over time. Is this normal?
Also, what's "OJTT" in these forums?
1. It is possible for Omega Baby PloProf 166.0250 to have 1973 production year and caliber 1012 movement.
2. I have a service dial, as the top indice is solid.
3. It's underdetermined that I have a Watchco Frankenstein. This may be an original Omega, with the service dial.
Let me know if I'm off on any of the above. Also here are a few more photos of the case and dial as some have asked.
When I look for Chrono24 and other listings, none of the Omega Baby PloProf are listed as Watchco's. What would a typical market value be for a Watchco version, if an original Omega is about US$4K to $6K today?
Why does it seem like there is a clear plastic layer over the markings on the bezel? I cannot see it visually with a loupe, only by touch and feel that it's smooth. The markings on the bezel do not seem exposed to the environment, yet they have patina'd over time. Is this normal?
Also, what's "OJTT" in these forums?
Edited:
- Posts
- 5,856
- Likes
- 16,756
gemini4
··Hoarder Of Speed et alia
- Posts
- 3,979
- Likes
- 8,986
cvalue13
·I can ascertain the following...
1. It is possible for Omega Baby PloProf 116.0250 to have 1973 production year and caliber 1012 movement.
2. I have a service dial, as the top indice is solid.
3. It's underdetermined that I have a Watchco Frankenstein. This may be an original Omega, with the service dial.
You do not have a Watchco, assuming the case and bezel are ‘original.’
I’d defer to @simonsays regarding the bezel being original and so the case necessarily being original as well; as for the movement, it seems like the caliber and year-by-serial are consistent . If desired, the way to beat confirm that the movement was for a baby P, when and where it was delivered, etc., would be to get an extract of archives from Omega to shed further light on the movement/case/bezel origins. That’s not necessary, but could be a nice thing to have (including if you ever go to sell).
Meanwhile I stuck by the both the dial and handsets being service replacements (and I’m personally still suspicious of the date wheel being a service replacement as well).
As @simonsays mentioned, the scenario of having the dial/handsets replaced is consistent with, for example, a water damage event under the crystal having been repaired.
- Posts
- 1,344
- Likes
- 1,958
simonsays
·On a 1012 mov 37,xxx,xxx is expected to be 1975/76. These watches being released in 1978 makes it not miles off but still not what I would expect. I have not owned one of these for about 10 years so memory of mov. numbers is non existent.
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 6
Bentobox
·On a 1012 mov 37,xxx,xxx is expected to be 1975/76. These watches being released in 1978 makes it not miles off but still not what I would expect. I have not owned one of these for about 10 years so memory of mov. numbers is non existent.
Are we sure the release date was 1978? I'm finding some indication on the internet that the Baby PloPro was released in 1972/1973, such as here: http://www.db1983.com/our-archive/omega-seamaster-1660250-baby-ploprof-1973
Omega serial number sequencing indicates my Movement 1012 of 37,xxx,xxx is dated 1973. https://www.bobswatches.com/omega/serial-numbers
- Posts
- 1,344
- Likes
- 1,958
simonsays
·Serial numbers are not all in date order. Different calibers have serial numbers assigned, and in different date ranges, out of sequence to other calibers.
Although Davidoff are experienced dealers, I would trust AJTT over sales patter
That their watch has a serial number in line with yours makes me think your watch is worth an EOA request, and is more than likely correct
Can you edit the title of the thread to 166.0250 in case of future reference
Although Davidoff are experienced dealers, I would trust AJTT over sales patter
That their watch has a serial number in line with yours makes me think your watch is worth an EOA request, and is more than likely correct
Can you edit the title of the thread to 166.0250 in case of future reference
Edited:
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 6
Bentobox
·You guys are great!
The deed is done. I ordered the Extract of the Archives from the Omega site. We'll find out in 15 days-ish.
I fixed the typo on the case number. Thanks for pointing that out.
The deed is done. I ordered the Extract of the Archives from the Omega site. We'll find out in 15 days-ish.
I fixed the typo on the case number. Thanks for pointing that out.
- Posts
- 1,344
- Likes
- 1,958
simonsays
·Please keep us updated, either way it will be interesting to know the result.
- Posts
- 155
- Likes
- 212
dootcho
·Yeah, based on several contradictory pieces of info including the OJTT apparent assertion that it came with both cals, I think the most that could be said is “it’s possible either cal is correct without sorting out some Omega history - good luck with that” That said...
I have a vague memory that the watch was equipped with both calibers depending on the market it was delivered, I made a quick search and Cal 1010 is a 17 jewels movement while Cal 1012 is a 23 jewels movement, i think it has to do with certain countries' (believe US in primis) taxation being higher for higher jewel counts
best regards
Duccio
- Posts
- 3
- Likes
- 0
nikbeach
·Hi Guys, I too own one of these beauties, this is from the Omega Website, 1978 is prod year, not early 70's as many watch sites claim in error. enjoy, Nik
- Posts
- 3
- Likes
- 0
nikbeach
·Here's the link sorry;
https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/watch-omega-seamaster-120-st-166-0250
https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/watch-omega-seamaster-120-st-166-0250
- Posts
- 10
- Likes
- 16
j_dubble_u
·You guys are great!
The deed is done. I ordered the Extract of the Archives from the Omega site. We'll find out in 15 days-ish.
I fixed the typo on the case number. Thanks for pointing that out.
new member who acquired a similar watch, and I’m interested to see what the Extract response is. I read elsewhere on a different thread they denied the request. So much to learn.
- Posts
- 968
- Likes
- 1,521
flqt-9000
·I observed also sigle piece at 12 tritium dials. To my experience the best way to recognize a service dial is to look at the indices: tritium dials have applied stripes of tritium with some tickness, it can resemble a sort of tritium tape, while the luminova ones have are more like a drop of paint.
here is a picture of an original tritium dial, unfortunately the stripes of tritium are not mich visible.
concerning the caliber, examples equipped with both 1010 and 1012 can be observed, It may be that both were used.
here is a picture of an original tritium dial, unfortunately the stripes of tritium are not mich visible.
concerning the caliber, examples equipped with both 1010 and 1012 can be observed, It may be that both were used.
- Posts
- 968
- Likes
- 1,521
flqt-9000
·And as proof of what I wrote, here is an extract of archive stating a 1010 movement:
