Hi All

My first real post on here so be gentle.

I have known Mothra (Stu) for more years than I care to comment on and have avoided getting sucked into some of his passions. Motorbikes I have managed to avoid completely. Ice Diving was a very simple "No thanks". But Watches is a fight I seem to be finally losing. I took a couple of tentative steps last year, though they were not that successful and then life got in the way. However have started once again this year looking at things, with a more considered eye. A couple of weeks ago I spotted this interesting little Seamaster 600 which plucked at my heart strings despite there being only one poor quality photo. I studied it hard and decided that most of the damage seemed to be on the Crystal rather than the dial so thought it was worth a punt. Well for less than £90 including costs and shipping it's now in my hands. And from what I can currently tell I was correct. Stu's comment on getting a look at it was "Lucky, lucky...sod". Well that was the polite version. The dial not only looks clean as far as I can tell so far but it also runs and keeps time. Having cracked it open tonight it's a Calibre 611, 17 jewel, adjusted 2 positions with Reference number 24054402. The case back has the Seamaster logo on it and inside has the number 136.012. This is where things vary slightly from the only other detailed information Stu and I were able to dig up on a similar one http://forums.watchnet.com/?t=rview&th=229778&goto=291424 which has 136.001. Checking the vintage database 136.0011 gives descriptions including Seamaster 600 but 136.0012 refers to Geneve. Would this mean that it's a replacement back or just an anomaly of production/database?

I'd be very interested to know any general thoughts on the watch and indeed if anyone has an identical one. My plan is to get it serviced (recommendations gratefully accepted as WatchGuy.co.uk is very busy and focusing on his existing customers) have the crystal and crown replaced and then to wear it. And obviously update this thread once it is looking it's best.



Thanks in advance

Paul

 

I think this is a really nice Speedmaster 'companion'. The dial looks immaculate under the crystal - even at the 5:00 marker, and the case is totally unpolished - with a new crystal it'll look great. The Geneve case ref on the case back is a puzzler though - cheekyweemonkey, you need to post a piccie of the hippocampus so people can comment on originality. I'm sure I've seen one of these elsewhere on this forum, but have been unable to track it down....

 

Here you go

 

I suspect that the caseback has been changed, either on purpose or by accident. It doesn't really matter, it's a very nice little watch.

Being the pedant I am, I wouldn't class it as a true "Speedie Companion", although it shares similarities to the Companion.

The true Companion has no cross hairs and no date, and has dots at 12 and second markers between the minute indexes

I'd call this one more of a "Drinkin' Buddy".

 

beginners luck! Sweet find, it will clean up very nicely, oh and welcome to the dark side........

 

Thanks for the input and comments. I will look up Stefan. I can see my learning curve is going to be steep and continuous.
Looks like I will have to keep searching for a "real" Speedie Companion, but that's OK I don't have a Speedmaster yet either. Shame on me.
I'll keep reading and hope my Beginners luck holds for a while.

 

I like your watch, especially the yellowed tritium, and welcome Paul!

Not sure if it helps, but I have a Geneve ST131.019 which has a similar kind of dial, with crosshairs and a red Omega symbol, but it has a cal 601 (no date) instead. These are pretty robust manual-wind movements so yours will be fine I'm sure.



There's also a page from a catalog at old-omegas.com which shows a Seamaster 600 with a red Omega symbol and crosshairs, similar to yours, but with an additional inner ring of markers and no date. Perhaps your watch and that watch were part of the many dial variations produced in the 60's? Hope this helps.

edit: hey I found a SM600 that looks like yours but with red crosshairs, here.

 

I think OP's watch also has red crosshairs.

 

Nice looking watch NT931.
Mothra had already sent me a thread which when I followed it I got to that same image from Old-Omegas.com but thanks for referencing it. It's a resource I will need to have a good look through. I have to say I love the simplicity of this style of watch. And with my puny wrists they seem to fit quite well. I really do like that one with that additional inner ring of markers. Will have to keep an eye out for one of those in the future.
And thanks for the additional link. That does indeed seem to be the same dial as mine. Good to know there is more than one of them in existence.

 

Yes it does have Red Cross Hairs - though a bit tricky to see through the smegged crystal and poor photo

 

Time to see my optician!

 

......or bigger monitor screen ........

 

CheekyMonkey I have a 136.011 with a cal. 611 and believe as Jim has suggested above that somewhere along the line your case back was switched out (possibly original damaged) . The 136.012 should have a cal. 613 movement (and is a Geneve model as you already know). Our watches are identical in every way except for the dial and I believe yours was originally a ref. 136.011. Some pictures for comparison...




Even though your case back has a different reference the Hippocampus is identical to the 136.011 case back. Your serial # looks like a 23mil from your pictures dating yours to roughly 1966 (mine from ~1964). Hope this helps a little...I wouldn't worry about the case back, they are identical except for the ref. #, you have a nice find there...get it serviced and enjoy it!

 

Wow. Nice watch hijak. Paul, theres a target for you to aim at...

 

Actually with a new crystal on Paul's watch he'll have quite a stunner...love that dial. The case and dial look to be in very good shape. And thank you for the compliment M!

 

At old-omegas.com they have a scan of an Omega booklet showing several iterations of these references

 

As Stu says that is a lovely watch in great condition Hijack. Definitely something for me to keep an eye out for in the future as a "brother" to mine. Thanks for sharing.

 

Thanks for the compliment Paul, but yours isn't too shabby either...with a little TLC you've got a winner there.