Forums Latest Members
  1. speedyseady Jun 3, 2017

    Posts
    3
    Likes
    27
    Hello all:

    I have a Seamaster 300 CK 14755 which I am hoping to confirm the originality of and date.

    The case back says "14755 2"
    The movement number is 16,xxx,xxx.

    The movement number is earlier than most 14755s I've seen (which seem to mostly be in the 18M range). However, I am thinking mine may be an early example because I believe the movement number dates it to 1958/59 and 1959, as I understand it, is when the CK 14755 was first produced.

    The watch is otherwise in really, really nice condition although I believe the bezel is an "Aldo." I tested the watch with a Geiger counter and got a very strong reading so I am confident the dial is original. The Hippocampus on the case back is very well preserved.

    Attached are photos of the movement, interior caseback and dial.

    Thanks for any insight the experts can offer to confirm or deny originality of this watch. I'd also appreciate if you can confirm my dating of this watch to about 1959.

    Thanks!
     
    IMG_0546.JPG IMG_0738.JPG IMG_3931.PNG
    Edited Jun 3, 2017
    gemini4 likes this.
  2. bags1971 Jun 3, 2017

    Posts
    1,844
    Likes
    3,818
    very nice :)
     
    speedyseady likes this.
  3. noiseboyuk Jun 3, 2017

    Posts
    414
    Likes
    884
    I can't be of any help where originality etc. is concerned.
    But, it looks fab - nice one !!
     
    speedyseady likes this.
  4. kox Jun 3, 2017

    Posts
    561
    Likes
    2,562
    IMO it is very unlikely that it was produced in 1959. That was pretty early in the 2913 production.
    The first 14755's were produced very late 1961/early 1962 and yes, they had serial 182x.
    My 14755-1 below was produced in february 1962 and has serial 182929xx. IMO so does yours.
    I think you misread the "8" for a "6". The 6 is more rounded than yours "6". The engraving of the 6 and 8 does look very much alike and if you have only looked at it in pictures that are not 100% clear and in focus you could be fooled. Look again with a good lupe.
    It's all correct and a very nice one. Enjoy.

    Udklip.JPG

    [​IMG]
     
    TNTwatch, flame, SgWatchBaron and 3 others like this.
  5. speedyseady Jun 3, 2017

    Posts
    3
    Likes
    27
    @kox
    Wow. Many thanks for this! Your analysis is really helpful and quite compelling in proving the originality of my watch. Amazing that the serial numbers of our watches are so close.

    I have wondered whether the second numeral was a "6" or an "8." It is hard to make out for sure, but given that our serial numbers are the same except for the last two digits I am quite convinced and satisfied that it is an 8 (like yours), thereby putting it right in the correct range.

    One last question- How do you date your watch as a 1962 production? One article I've read indicates the 14755 production started in 1960 and not late 1961. http://chronomaddox.com/seamaster_3oo_a_history.html

    Thanks for your responses and sharing the information.
     
    kox likes this.
  6. Dash1 Jun 4, 2017

    Posts
    1,825
    Likes
    3,502
    Get an extract from Omegas archive, it will give you the exact production date of your watch and where it was delivered to. It will also confirm that the movement left the factory with that case reference. Well worth the price for such a nice watch imo.
     
    OMGRLX and SgWatchBaron like this.
  7. kox Jun 4, 2017

    Posts
    561
    Likes
    2,562
    As Ash said, get an official extract from Omega. That's how I know when mine was produced. And I also have a rather large archive with other SM300's and their Omega confirmed production dates to back up the production times of the different SM300 references etc.
    Some of those old articles on the web, are now quite imprecise, as we have learned more through the years... and some are based on the generel Omega serial chart, which can't be used for the specific models at all. They are off by 1 or 2 years.

    Enjoy...
     
    propervinyl likes this.