Interesting misprinted case back (Seamaster 300 content)

brinsmead

HF 166.024 case back supplied from new

reficul_x

That’s extremely common. The bezel has a weak design and once it’s bumped, moisture can get in into that area underneath the plastic and age the tritium.

There are 3 types of lume on this 165.024

The earlier 2 would have either the pin hole at 12 & 6 (which is more common) and the other does not at all. The one that does not have the pin hole is hard to tell from original from the fake to the novice. But when you know how to tell from the texture, you will know. If you Google, you will see many aged examples without the pinhole as well.

The last example would be the really flat lume, with pin holes. They are usually greenish and when they age, they aged to a olive green if they are not damaged by moisture.

They are usually the last batch of the 165.024 Sm300.

reficul_x

I think it’s more like a misprint than a run out of stock case. Those usually reused case back scenario usually have the old reference number striked off with the new reference number engraved on it. (But always with the correct outer model stamping)

brinsmead

may be........I'll stick with my senecio. for the time being........for both CB and HF to have the same outcome.!

reficul_x

An update here, this misprint is now official.
Debunking any doubts here. 😀

gemini4

I believe it was the ebaybarn

Vausa412

I'm just not brave/knowledgeable enough yet for Ebay. What a find this is though! Have always wanted a vintage Seamaster 300.

brinsmead

What we should be asking is why did Omega keep using Omega quoted“Misprinted* case backs for over two years and from two manufactures both HF and CB, taking into account that your case back is original, and not a replacement that was fitted years later. I know mine is original because I purchased in new in 1970 and is a 69 model.

The Omega certificate says, It says a small batch ,that would imply a single production run.

If it did happen over a few years, by the dating of our two watches : I would ask, how come there’re repeating this mistake over a long period and releasing these watches for distribution, so that beggars the question: Did they know?

brinsmead

What we should be asking is why did Omega keep using Omega quoted“Misprinted* case backs for over two years and from two manufactures both HF and CB, taking into account that your case back is original, and not a replacement that was fitted years later. I know mine is original because I purchased in new in 1970 and is a 69 model.

The Omega certificate says, It says a small batch ,that would imply a single production run.

If it did happen over a few years, by the dating of our two watches : I would ask, how come there’re repeating this mistake over a long period and releasing these watches for distribution, so that beggars the question: Did they know?

Vausa412

You've kept the watch for almost 50 years?? That's incredible. My oldest watch is a 1956 Seamaster but I'm sure I'm just one in the long line of owners. And judging by the pictures, you've been taking care of it, too. Such a beautiful specimen!