Is this watch real or fake thread - aka Fake Busters!!

Posts
68
Likes
82
Forgot to mention that the crown does bear an Omega logo (the "Ω"), and that the front case glass is missing.
 
Posts
68
Likes
82
There goes my triple date, moonphase, Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra Co-axial Escapement 150m/500ft Sunday find!
Thanks! It was worth my peanuts, though, enjoyable morning looking at really cool watches (not mine!)
 
Posts
78
Likes
584
Those 'Speedmasters' come up for sale from the same seller quite often, they're fakes that go to some lengths to deceive buyers. Sorry you ended up with one, but you've done us a service actually looking into where the parts come from / the inside. Can you photograph your watch thoroughly and maybe create a thread here?

Hi abroad520

I will show you a few more close up pics of the questionable areas on the movement.

The picture above shows the top of the movement.

The picture above show the engraving 18 jewels.

The picture above shows the use of plastic on one of the components.

The picture above shows the re-engraved serial number 27773342 which omega quote as belonging to a different caliber and model. You can also see a poorly engraved 861 on the base plate without the Omega signature. I hope the pictures help highlight the forgery involved. Stay vigilant.
 
Posts
1
Likes
0
Hi,

New to the forum.

I'm looking at buying my first seamaster and have been offered this one online at a decent price. Would anyone be able to tell if its authentic?

Thanks!
 
Posts
280
Likes
1,016
I was offered this watch by someone i know at a great price but i am a bit reluctant.
I can't put my finger on it but i feel it's fake
 
Posts
345
Likes
969
I agree that it doesn't look right. Date too sunken , bracelet engraving looks poor. I am no expert though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Posts
272
Likes
208
just comparing it with pics on the interwebs i can already see many easy inconsistencies. Is that a ref 2210.50?
 
Posts
9
Likes
8
I agree. If it is indeed a 2210.50 there should be beveling in the dial where the date is. It looks far too sunken
 
Posts
272
Likes
208
I agree. If it is indeed a 2210.50 there should be beveling in the dial where the date is. It looks far too sunken

that and the bezel numbers are too close to that inner ring, different font on the subidal numbers, "Swiss made" looks too close to the ticks
 
Posts
9
Likes
8
that and the bezel numbers are too close to that inner ring, different font on the subidal numbers, "Swiss made" looks too close to the ticks[/QUOT Good call, this is just one of those watches that just looks off
 
Posts
16,741
Likes
47,363
Easiest way on these is the case back hippocampus ( tail and head check will make it easier for noobs )

Above one


Below (real one )
 
Posts
1
Likes
0
Hi All,

Newbie here, any thoughts most welcome!

What do you make of this; supposedly bought in the late 80's, price unknown. It wasn't running last year, I had the battery and band replaced and the watchsmith seemed to think it was real...

I can't find other examples like it on the net and that got me thinking, is it a fake?

The movement is fine, appears to work just like other 1365s on youtube.

Any information would be great,

Cheers



 
Posts
16,741
Likes
47,363
Posts
9,595
Likes
27,661
I'd like to show this:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RARE-VINT...232921?hash=item237aceddd9:g:q8cAAOSwa~BYbk5C

I see issues with the dial, but is a redial or has it had markers/hands replaced? And how about that caseback? The whole thing has a sort of half-baked feel to it, but I can't say if it due to fakery or just heavy wear badly covered up.



Please see the auction for other photos. Curious to hear what you think.
 
This website may earn commission from Ebay sales.