- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 4
**HELP PLEASE**
- Posts
- 219
- Likes
- 240
Winston_Smith
·With such low quality pictures from the front and no pictures from the inside of the watch (movement shots), it's hard to make a judgement. But my hunch is it's very, very likely to be a junk.
- Posts
- 16,307
- Likes
- 44,995
JwRosenthal
·It looks like the 366.0823 but the dial proportions look like it may be the ladies version (midsize). If it is the smaller one then the value is a fraction of the 35mm version.
- Posts
- 5,082
- Likes
- 15,701
DaveK
·With such low quality pictures from the front and no pictures from the inside of the watch (movement shots), it's hard to make a judgement. But my hunch is it's very, very likely to be a junk.
I don’t know the ref at all, but it does look fake, or at least poorly redialed with poorly repainted hands. @HenryBeer, what’s the backstory on this watch?
- Posts
- 97
- Likes
- 94
filfb22
·Well the name of the thread seems appropriate... streched bracelet, strange Omega logo, strange proportions... but it seems reference 166.0124 so I would not say it is fake
- Posts
- 13,209
- Likes
- 22,973
Davidt
·If it’s the full size version I agree it’s a 166.0124 but I also think it could be the ladies version.
Confirming the case size is critical.
Dial originality needs better pictures.
Confirming the case size is critical.
Dial originality needs better pictures.
- Posts
- 13,483
- Likes
- 31,778
X350 XJR
··Vintage Omega AficionadoThat dial just doesn't look right, I think it's trying to be this:
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 4
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 4
- Posts
- 13,483
- Likes
- 31,778
X350 XJR
··Vintage Omega Aficionado
- Posts
- 13,483
- Likes
- 31,778
Similar threads
- Posts
- 6
- Views
- 118
- Posts
- 4
- Views
- 168
- Posts
- 1
- Views
- 249
- Posts
- 19
- Views
- 486
- Posts
- 13
- Views
- 586