Bought a vintage Omega Geneve (166.0163) on eBay. Possible redial?

Hi there,

A few days ago I took a chance on a vintage Omega Geneve (166.0163) that I found on eBay for £200. The purchase was an impulsive one, and I didn't do much research prior to placing my bid. In complete honesty, this is my first vintage watch, and I jumped at the chance at owning an Omega for the first time.

After arriving, I posted photos of the watch on Reddit. An insightful (yet slightly disheartening) Redditor commented, saying that the watch dial didn't look original, as it lacked the sunburst effect that is found on most 166.0163 Omega Geneves. He also said the hands looked wrong, as they looked thick and didn't have any evidence of lume on them.

After seeing this comment, I did a bit more research and found that the dial looks much more like a dial from a 166.0168 Geneve, not a 166.0163. As for the hands, I'm not sure where they are from.

To put it simply, I'm a bit unsure about what to think of my watch now. I have no idea whether to consider this as a legitimate vintage Omega anymore or some weird frankenwatch that most collectors will frown upon.

I would like to hear some thoughts (and possible reassurance for a new collector) on this. I have attached a photo of my watch, alongside photos of genuine 166.0163 and 166.0168 models that I found online.

Thank you!

hi
i am definitely not an expert and hopefully others will answer to, but i think the dial looks fine.
the minute marker looks a bit too short and the crown looks like a replacement.

Thank you for the reply. What makes you so sure about the dial? Could it still be legitimate even if it does have the sunburst pattern present on most 166.0163 Geneves?

The font looks quite good to me but I'm no expert on Geneves...

Other popular dress watches from Omega came with different dial variants, sunburst of course one of the most common ones.

As mentioned the hands look wrong: They have another tail end and no lume on them though the dial shows lume

The case of your watch looks a bit worn but its your first vintage watch so enjoy it!

Sorry, mine is the first one shown. I should have specified that. Thanks for the reply.

Thank you for the reply. I thought the same when I saw it. The font looks good, but every the majority of Geneves I've seen online have the sunburst effect, so I'm really not sure. I'm not too bothered about the hands, I think the look good!

I have owned my share of geneves and that dial is fine. Plenty of non-sun burst versions out there.

I'm relieved to hear this, although does this also apply for 166.0163 models?

In an effort to increase my knowledge, I tried to play along at home with the experts on this one and noticed a couple of things that perhaps someone will provide comment or clarification. In the watch under scrutiny, I see serifs on the two "A"s in "AUTOMATIC" which does not appear on the comparables. Similarly, the "S" in Swiss does not appear to be symmetric as on the comparables. Is this anything or just a little bit of "fly poop in the pepper"?

As Jim says it depends on who made them. Regarding “swiss made” be aware that the curvature of the crystal edges can distort the text a bit. I think that’s what’s going on here with the first S.

In general there are so many different dial versions out there and different markets the watches were made for, so its difficult to set hard rules as to which dial finishes fit specific references within the Geneve line (apart from obvious things like Geneve Dynamic dials being for specific references etc.).

I would like to follow up with a couple of comments for additional understanding:

First, it seem to me that the dial of a watch, any watch, is essentially a trademark of the manufacturer. As such, it identifies the source of a particular product and stands for a certain level of quality. Both large and small companies zealously guard the look and appearance of their trademarks in establishing and protecting their brand. This includes strict adherence to detailed specifications when dealing with their mark including the use of a particular font. Many times the fonts are trade secrets making it nearly impossible to find the source of the font. Of course, it is disclosed to suppliers under strict rules of confidentiality. This is especially true with heavily counterfeited items so as to make them even more recognizable as being non-authentic. In this instance, it would seem to me that the manufacturers of the dials for Omega would have been required to adhere to the use of a particular font with no exceptions given the importance of a trademark to a company like Omega.

Second, I seem to remember having seen several posts where dials were deemed to be "redials" based on the use of a particular font or otherwise just not the way Omega did things. Isn't it highly possible, many of these dials could be likewise be due to who made the dial for Omega or any of the other explanations offered in this post?

Thanks, I am just trying to wrap my head around this issue.

I think you are addressing my most recent comment but you may have me confused with the OP.