We are familiar with the watches that @DON coined as Companion watches for the Speedmaster and Seamaster but has anyone seen a Seamaster 300 companion by another name?
I Hope you don't mind a slow reveal inspired by @Jonatan nos thread.

165.024
My Watchco I built.

The 165.002 "Seamaster 300 Companion"

What is that?! A Tissot! A Seastar Seven looking very similar to the Seamaster 300 and companion! The Seastar is a front loader where the 165.002 has a screw back case. The crown is also signed Tissot. Here it is on the funky bracelet it came with. Too bad it is too big for these lugs.

Has anyone else seen one of these?

 

Looks good and IMO looks much better in leather

 

Was this a recent purchase?

 

I don't mean the the bearer of bad news, but I think your Seastar Seven should look a bit like this:


Tissot applied the name "Seastar" to many different models, but to my knowledge the Seastar Seven was generally a dressy watch, positioned at the upper end of the Seastar model line, commonly with applied hour markers and the "-T-" logo.

 

I made this purchase within the last year.
I'm not very familiar with Tissot but I believe my watch to be uncommon yet correct. I just did an image search and this Visodate is the only similar one I can come up with. The dial on my watch has patina and open 6 and 9. I believe it to be correct.

 

Unfortunately it's common to find Tissot redialed to look like Omega. Like many of the smaller brands, there are no reference books on Tissot like Sala or AJTT, and the block capital "TISSOT" logo used from 1960 onwards is easy to copy and pass off to unsuspecting buyers. I suspect Tissot is a favorite target of the Mumbai redialers for that reason.

Despite the drawbacks, it is in inexpensive marque to collect. I'd encourage you to get a copy of TISSOT: 150 Years of History 1853-2003 by Estelle Fallet. It's 230 pages of company history that makes for an interesting read. Although it is not a product reference guide, there are plenty of pictures and you'll get a good feel for what is correct.

 

Thanks for the link to the reference book. Looks like I'll have to research this. For what it's worth I did not purchase the watch from India and if it happens to be a redial it is better than the average Seamaster 300 fake with stubbies, closed 6 and 9 and flat lume. Thank you for your helpful critique!