Calling On Our Vintage Seamaster Experts

Posts
8,999
Likes
46,215
Good morning, all. I’m currently considering the possible purchase of a 1962 Seamaster reference 14389-12-CSP (photo below). Candidly, I’m having trouble determining whether the watch is a franken, a redial, some combination of the two, or genuine. Here’s the issue. In looking at many 14389 photos, I cannot find a single one with alpha hands AND no “Seamaster” text on the dial. One or the other, yes, but not both. That being said, I know that the 14xxx references have many dial variations so maybe I’m overthinking this? It's difficult for me to believe that this is a redial because the lume dots on the hour markers are intact and appear to be radium and who's going to mess with that? Anyway, what say you, OF experts?
Edited:
 
Posts
1,852
Likes
5,381
Are the hands (Especially the second hand) and the markers the same colour ?
 
Posts
8,999
Likes
46,215
The color of the hour and minute hands appear to match with the markers. I think that the second hand may be a replacement, but that would not be a deal breaker for me.
 
Posts
2,822
Likes
9,160
Pet peeve of mine when sellers take pics of a watch at 10:09. Those watches always tend to be most expensive somehow. 🙄

It looks okay to me. Get more pics of it in different lighting.

Not having seamaster to me isn't terribly uncommon.
 
Posts
3,133
Likes
5,557
It looks fine to me. There are some strange marks at the lower ends of the 1 2 and 3 markers but I think they're just from reflected light. I can't see any problem with the script or the minute marker spacing. The case looks nice.
 
Posts
4,803
Likes
14,383
Pet peeve of mine when sellers take pics of a watch at 10:09. Those watches always tend to be most expensive somehow. 🙄

It looks okay to me. Get more pics of it in different lighting.

Not having seamaster to me isn't terribly uncommon.
The new pics are at 12:09, this should knock 25% off the price
 
Posts
8,999
Likes
46,215
The new pics are at 12:09, this should knock 25% off the price
I’ll try that when I buy a Speedmaster 105.012. 😁
 
Posts
211
Likes
1,243
Did you end up buying it, and figuring anything out about it? Looks gorgeous!
 
Posts
8,999
Likes
46,215
I did buy it and it’s legit. Turned out to be a very nice 1962 Seamaster in excellent condition with an unpolished case and pristine dial and handset. The cordovan strap from RIOS1931 was a nice bonus too.
 
Posts
211
Likes
1,243
I did buy it and it’s legit. Turned out to be a very nice 1962 Seamaster in excellent condition with an unpolished case and pristine dial and handset. The cordovan strap from RIOS1931 was a nice bonus too.
Awesome, love happy endings. I feel like after obsessing with 50s and 60s omegas you develop quite an accurate sixth sense or BS meter when looking at new material. Enjoy in good health and DIBs
 
Posts
647
Likes
1,494
If you are happy that's all that is important. Question(s)...why would they leave the name Seamaster off the dial? Because of space for the sub dial seconds hand? Were the cases and movements exclusive to just one model (the Seamaster)?
 
Posts
211
Likes
1,243
If you are happy that's all that is important. Question(s)...why would they leave the name Seamaster off the dial? Because of space for the sub dial seconds hand? Were the cases and movements exclusive to just one model (the Seamaster)?


I'm not sure if we or anyone knows why sometimes they left the name Seamaster of the dial. There are tons of refs with subdials that have the word seamaster on top. I am intending to start a thread on this phenomenon soon, describing these so called "Nomasters" which are seamasters that do not say so on the dial.

For example, I have two lovely 14774 references, one says seamaster, one does not. Both fully original. You can look at new omegas everyday for years and still find new configurations...