One would not expect to see a cal 351 with a chromometre dial, although supposedly some were rated. Original dial, refinished dial, swapped movement... Thoughts... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=261416797792&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:3160Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
Isn't it meant to be 352? What's the relevance of 352 printed inside the caseback? I think he made a mistake Edit: just seen the movement pics. Could be a swapped movement?
I don't like anything on that watch. The case is too polished for my taste, I think the dial was cleaned or redone (something is amiss since it's in MUCH better condition than the hands), and I don't believe a 351 is correct for a chronometer 2577 case.
The dial is a fabulous refinish. Look at the 10 o’clock position. There is some uneven spacing. Also no T’s on the Swiss Made, as this dial has tritium on the markers. Someone wanted to custom-create a chronometre.
Everything on that watch is correct except the refinished (?) dial. It is a 2577 18K gold Seamaster powered by a 351 manufactured somewhere in South America. Case back was faintly engraved 2 ref # 2577 and 2520. Long time ago, I bought one like that from Peru with original dial. Here are some pics.
Wow, if that's a redial it's scary good. There is a possibility is that the dial is original, but came from a different watch that had shorter hands. The hands should not be hanging over the minutes register like that. See Hoi's example for the correct orientation of hand length and dial registers. There's also a possibility of an incorrect service dial used on a non-rated movement. Certainly not done by Omega. IMO, it's a franken, but just not sure which parts were swapped around. gatorcpa
I think the dial is probably original. Hoi may be correct about the pairing of the case and movement but could also be a marriage of case, dial and movement from 3 different watches. Minute hand too long. One thing we can probably all agree on - the case is too polished.
I'm in the refinished dial camp, and while it is not my sole bit of evidence, I'd love to see a close-up as it appears as though the refinisher may have put an accent after the last "e", which would be a dead giveaway. Perhaps it's just a speck of dirt, though. In any case, the lume that is nestled into the bases of the hour markers looks way too neat to my eye.
Not sure if it's redialed, the lume looks properly aged around the hour markers and is flaking off the 6 square which I've seen on similar dials. If it's redialed and relumed it's a pretty good job...
My thought is that the dial is original, it simply looks too good with appropriate patination, which would be nearly impossible to get if it were a refinish, its just from another watch. Unfortunately here is an example where an uninformed is likely going to overpay by not doing their homework. So, do I report it as a franken or let someone get burnt?
Still a $1,000 watch even with this dial. It would be very easy to buy this one, get another with a decent dial, then sell the Chronometer dial for halfway decent money. gatorcpa
But it is being sold as a chronometre, which is significant misrepresentation, that's where I have an issue. To quote the seller "Omega 17 jewel chronometer grade caliber 351 bumper automatic movement", in addition to numerous other references of the term chronometre/chronometer in the description. We all know how often a inexperienced buyer gets caught up in a sellers BS, don't do proper research and up paying too much.