Hand condition on vintage Seamaster 300 (166.024-67)

Posts
397
Likes
929
I'm curious as to what the experts think has happened to these hands on my vintage SM300?

My first thoughts were that they were relumed but could they have been "touched up" to stop the cracks from expanding? Or is this just cracked?

Thanks for the help!

 
Posts
11,198
Likes
19,641
The minute hand in particular looks relumed. I’d guess the original lume cracked and this was a half arsed repair.
 
Posts
215
Likes
163
I`ve never seen a 166.024 with batton hands...so somebody was playing with it... the cracks are weird looking, would say relume with some relic job to make it look vintage? UV light photo may help also as stated.
 
Posts
11,198
Likes
19,641
I`ve never seen a 166.024 with batton hands...so somebody was playing with it... the cracks are weird looking, would say relume with some relic job to make it look vintage? UV light photo may help also as stated.

Baton hands were certainly seen on early 166.024’s.
 
Posts
215
Likes
163
Baton hands were certainly seen on early 166.024’s.
I`ve seen baton hands on US market 1968 series, but that is no date version.
If you can show me some 166.024 with baton hands, I`ll gladly extend my knowledge.
First batch of 166.024 for public was made OCT1968. They were Naiad crow equipped, big triangle, silver date window. I don`t count in the prototypes delivered to Comex, which are 1967 movements.
Edited:
 
Posts
11,198
Likes
19,641
I`ve seen baton hands on US market 1968 series, but that is no date version.
If you can show me some 166.024 with baton hands, I`ll gladly extend my knowledge.
First batch of 166.024 for public was made OCT1968. The were Naiad crow equipped, big triangle, silver date window. I don`t count in the prototypes delivered to Comex, which are 1967 movements.

Apologies, I thought you were referring to SM300 .024’s in general, not specifically date references.