Help on Omega Seamaster ref. 165.002

[Sermoor]

Hi, it's my first post here on the OF, happy to join the community. I'm currently trying to add a no-date vintage Seamaster to my collection and there is one that caught my eye. Seller claims that the crystal is a generic replacement (which I can see myself) and that the dial is factory original. I'm no expert in the topic yet, but to me there is something off about the font/letter spacing on the dial, especially the 'S' in the Seamaster. Can you please help me concluding if it's original or a redial? Big thanks

 

[Passover]

Hi and a warm welcome!

Dial is original IMO

Hands [EDIT: Hour and minute hands] are wrong , crown is also.

Thus said take a close look at movement, caseback etc.

Good luck!

 

[Davidt]

Agree, dial is original. Those hands can be correct for a 165.002 but only for dials with black painted/inlaid hour makers so likely replacement.

 

[Sermoor]

Thanks for the input. These answers really surprised me tbf. Now I can see that hands are indeed not matching, but for some reason I wasn’t able to spot that before posting. I guess I need some more research on the topic

 

[Passover]

Sermoor

Thanks for the input. These answers really surprised me tbf. Now I can see that hands are indeed not matching, but for some reason I wasn’t able to spot that before posting. I guess I need some more research on the topic

We all learn here every day so look around and have fun!

If you like to share some pics of your collection go ahead!

 

[Spruce]

Sermoor

Thanks for the input. These answers really surprised me tbf. Now I can see that hands are indeed not matching, but for some reason I wasn’t able to spot that before posting. I guess I need some more research on the topic

It’s often the case that you don’t notice an irregularity until you look at a clear photo.

That said, I also vote for original dial (and buckle) and I wouldn’t be in any rush to change the hands or crown. I’d just wear it.

Welcome to OF