Hi guys,

I found that unusual Seamaster for sale. Unfortunately I don't have more informations than "perfectly working" and 34mm. But there is a few pictures (not the movement)

I really like this dial with the crosshair and the texture (does that kind or texture has a name?) But since I've never seen it before as well as a crosshair without markers at 3/6/9 I wanted to have your opinion.

Do you think it's original?

Thanks

 

No. The S in seamaster is typical of watches older than this one. The printing is too heavy and rough, specially the crosshair. Look at the minute ticks around 5. Badly spaced. The dial is called a "linen" dial, and is very nice. But I think this one is reprinted.

 

Hmm I see, actually all markers seem not to be centered with the dots.

Thank you for the linen. A new word in my watch vocabulary!

I found this old thread showing the same one except for the hands. There was quite some debate but similar examples:

https://omegaforums.net/threads/vintage-omega-seamaster-crosshair-dial-identification.22578/

 

True. I can be wrong (has happened before) but I do not like that dial. Of course, a big part of the problem is not being able to see it in person. Pics are usually bad and out of focus, and do not help. Maybe I I saw it in my hands I would change my opinion.

 

Dial looks perfectly fine, as far as I can see

Uncommon dial, a shame that it has some dial degradation going on, giving it a slightly greenish tinge. The hands look a bit odd.

 

Cant recall that I’ve seen a Seamaster dial without markers at 3, 6 and 9 before. Also the crosshairs go through the last s of swiss - not a good sign of originality

I,d leave this well alone

 

There seems to be some disagreement on this one. I saw nothing that threw any red flags on my first look. Looks pretty good to me, but i’m not a pro on the seemingly millions of seamaster references

 

Yes, thats what make watches interesting.
But for my money, the cons outway the pros on this one, especially at the price, as i dont like the dial staining, the hands, lack of batons at 3, 6 and 9, the thick cross hairs, and if i,m being really picky, the placing of automatic is too close the the applied OMEGA - just doesnt look right to me

 

If you see a dial version you haven't encountered before, are your first inclination to a) dissmiss it as a redial or b) research a bit?

I'd recommend the latter.

There is nothing wrong with the lack of markers. Yes, it is uncommon, but it they had been removed, it would have meant that extensive dial surgery had been performed or that the entire dial was fake. The holes in the dial would have had to be filled in with the correct linen texture, all markers removed, entire dial cleaned of paint, then repainted (difficult to do on a textured dial), then lacquered and finally have remaining markers reapplied.
If you dig up the reference number on the monocoque Seamaster/Seamaster DeVilles you'll find some extraordinary dial designs - go and have a look if you don't believe me. A lot of funky stuff happened at Omega in the sixties.

There is nothing wrong with the crosshairs crossing SWISS MADE. Yes, it is uncommon, but it happens on some references. At the moment, I'm watching an auction on a 14ct version with this case style with all twelve markers on the dial and if you look closely, you can tell that the crosshairs on that particular watch also passes through SWISS MADE.

The coat hanger-S... Don't get me started. Suffice to say that there isn't a cut-off date as there is with the rounded vs. more angular applied logo - the coat hanger was brought back on later references and can be found very often, particularly on this type of front-loading Seamaster.

 

My 2c worth would be to avoid this one as well. The fonts look correct to me but there are troubling issues as pointed out above. Also, the applied Omega symbol is situated too high on the dial.

 

"Omega" and "Automatic" too close to each other?

 

Personally I think the dial is ok, though a bit of a weird design. But the hands are the wrong style and too short.

 

Redial with short hands (non Omega style)

 

Tough one. The fonts look good but the printing and crosshair look too heavy, however that may just be the photo.
I'd want to see some better pics....

 

First hit when you Google ”Omega front load seamaster cross hair”
https://omegaforums.net/threads/vintage-omega-seamaster-crosshair-dial-identification.22578/
Hands on op’s watch look like they have been cut off, otherwise reminding of these

 

The hands are spectacularly bad and as mentioned look cut off, maybe not even Omega hands. The printing on dials often looks heavy if you don't photograph it right so I don't see that as a tell. The fonts appear correct to me. I don't know how difficult it would be to redial a linen dial, I would imagine very difficult. Some of the little faults raising the dial surface also appear to have broken the crosshairs and I suppose a particularly imaginative redialler might just possibly have done that, but for me it's just too clever-clever. We are all entitled to our own opinions; personally I don't doubt that this dial is original.

Two fabulous watches in the previous post!

 

Just a final post on this one - I hope everyone is satisfied with the originality of the OP's watch (well, the dial at least!)?

Here's another like it: https://www.ebay.com/itm/orologio-o...628077?hash=item1c9a1c446d:g:cN0AAOSwt7hZcxsCPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network





Common as muck!

 

Thanks!
The bracelets does a lot to the appearance.
14765 is now sold but was overall very nice.

 

A non waterproof seamaster?