I would be very pleased if you would share your views and expertise on this watch. I'm considering it, but I'm not an expert enough to make a quick decision on this SM300.

Thanks!

 

Relume.

 

Thanks. Can you explain to me how I can best tell? Is it the color or the texture that tells you?
How does it compare to this one, where the dial is supposed to be original?
http://www.db1983.com/our-archive/omega-seamaster-300-165024-bt-19671?imageID=0

 

That one also has re-lumed hands. Comparing the dial and hands will help you develop your eye.

 

They say that a picture is worth 1000 words, so here is my 9,000 word answer:

 

Wow... Thank you much for this perfect comparison. I assume your illustrations on the left are completely original lume as well. Sorry, it's not easy if you haven't that trained eye.

What do you think of Relume, surely a significant price reduction? Is there anything else wrong with the watch?

 

As long as it is disclosed, the watch is priced accordingly, and you're OK with the watch and the price, no problem.
Problems start when re-lumes are not disclosed.

 

Thanks for your opionion. Have to ask back. The left side in your image post is also relumed, correct?

 

Would it make much sense to compare two re-lumes?
Look at the picture of the watch above. This is the finest example of a 165.024 BT that I have ever seen. Even the Bienne air under the plexi is original...

 

Lol, this is obviously correct, would make no sense ;-)
It really looks perfect!

 

Please do not offend this watch with words like "Perfect"

 

As far as relumes go, I think it’s very well done and is a very attractive watch. As mentioned, if it’s disclosed and priced accordingly- I would take the OP’s watch over a moldy original lumed watch any-day. If the originality of the lume doesn’t bother you (don’t confuse a relume with a redial- the dial looks legit) then I see nothing to object to about this watch.

 

Ooooops... that's offensive. In fact
This is the watch I was hoping to find. A dream, congratulations!

 

Not likely to find for many of us-ever. But, that watch is a reference piece at this point- wearing it would be foolish IMO. So if you want something to wear on the regular- nothing wrong with the one you posted.

 

Thanks for that honest opinion. This is exactly the thing I'm thinking about and I'm a little unsure about. If that's all there is to it, I can imagine.

Unfortunately there is no extract included and I am a bit worried that maybe other things are not right. I assume that the movement should be the original or is it common to find cal. 552 from other Omegas, especially the old SM300? That would probably be too much for me.

How is that to be evaluated?

 

The 552 was a common movement with a few other models. Only an extract can tell you if that movement came in an SM300- but is that important to you? The one you posted doesn’t look cobbled to me, in fact is looks like it was a well cared for watch that had a very well done dial relume. The question for you is what are your goals? Do you want a flawless shelf piece or do you want a nice piece to wear daily? Also- the price of the one you posted would be a big deciding factor. If they want collectible value- then pass and hold out for a collectible one. But if it’s priced fairly- I would wear it regularly.

 

Scenario 1.
Don’t think the movement in OP’s watch was factory installed, as it’s a 23.7xx.xx serial, too early for that bezel and really on the boarder for any sword hands and BT dial.

Scenario 2.
Or the other way around, the movement could be considered correct to the case, as the caseback is also an earlier one with the reference number without dot (165024 instead of 165.024), and has a push in crown.

That would make the BT dial, hands and bezel a later add to the watch?

I think scenario 2 is more likely.
In the very best case only the bezel has been changed to this watch.

So at least parts from two different watches what i can observe.

Love @ndgal ’s BT, it’s an really early one and love that it’s been sold new in Finland! Maybe he could chime in on what it says on the caseback of his one above, dot or no dot?

 

That sounds very reasonable. Regarding the BT dial. From when were these used? From what I have read, it would have been from late 1966, early 1967. Is this correct and how exactly can this be dated?

 

To my observations somewhere around 24.2xx.xxx serials. So much like ndgal’s one posted above.

 

Your answer is here:

https://omegaforums.net/threads/165-024-seamaster-300-hf-vs-cb-case.64678/