My Early Seamaster 120 Divers. What to look for and what to avoid.

sonicosa

Good eye - I think you are on to something. I was looking at the case back etching, and after doing the below experiment, it is much more consistently-aligned with the notches on both watches than I originally thought. (Edit, or should I say "in both sets of pictures?")

I guess we know what my "pretty confident" is worth now

There is also the scratch above "...R-120" that I'm not seeing clearly on keeponticking's watch, but that could be the lighting. Maybe @keepsonticking can share their thoughts since they have the watch in-hand.

Scarecrow Boat

The more I look at it, I feel pretty confident that it is the same watch. Going to the original watch from 2016 from @Fordex (who I can’t seem to tag for some reason), which here is a link to it
https://omegaforums.net/threads/seamaster-120-freshly-serviced.66182/

There is an image that shows the backside of the lug

Now, @keepsonticking ebays listing image

We can see the same scratch on the back side of the lug. Coincidentally, the surface the watch is photographed on appears to also have the same texture pattern… to show what I mean, here is an image from @Fordex

And image from keepsonticking

keepsonticking

I'm looking at the thread and trying to figure out exactly what is being stated. So...the watch belonged to one person and now another? Is that it? What the hell is the point of that observation? I'm a little confused. I think I got the watch from chrono24 years ago. What exactly is the question you all seem to have?

keepsonticking

Wait...is there some discussion taking place here as to the authenticity of my watch? Yes, I have it in hand. I'm not quite sure what exactly is being implied/stated here with regard to my watch. Someone please explain it to me as if I were a 5 yr old.

Before you sluths type something you'll wish you hadn't, you might want to slow down a bit. I have owned this watch for 10 yrs, and I can easily prove it's mine and correct. I know it's fun to start tossing around accusations, but you are way off track here. Now, if somebody used photos of my watch at some point, I can't say. I can say you are on the wrong trail.

keepsonticking

You know...I bet I posted that photo of my watch way back when so I could come back now and say it's the same watch? Right? I used a Jewish space laser to put the same marks on the watches...all in hopes of duping someone. Even if the hands are not original, I know they've been on for several years and have seen the same hands on several 120s over the years. Hands do get changed in service sometimes.

keepsonticking

You know...I bet I posted that photo of my watch way back when so I could come back now and say it's the same watch? Right? I used a Jewish space laser to put the same marks on the watches...all in hopes of duping someone. Even if the hands are not original, I know they've been on for several years and have seen the same hands on several 120s over the years. Hands do get changed in service sometimes.

keepsonticking

I've pretty much had my fill of posting, as it turns out. I had no idea potential service hands created so much discussion. I will take my abomination of a watch and go home. Damn.

keepsonticking

I've pretty much had my fill of posting, as it turns out. I had no idea potential service hands created so much discussion. I will take my abomination of a watch and go home. Damn.

keepsonticking

I'm pretty sure the drama was what I found when I logged on an hour ago. Amateur sleuths going apeshit over nothing. And my abomination comment was irony. Pat yourselves on the backs, watchologists. You found me out and saved the forum from a fate worse than....well....service replacement hands. (and I am still not convinced that's true) I'll keep the watch for now...maybe use my Jewish space laser to alter it slightly then try to pass it off as Speedmaster. Can't say it's been fun.

Davidt

Do they wear Speedmasters (with incorrect hands) on the Jewish space laser?

keepsonticking

I've gone back over the posts in this thread to try to get some understanding of how things went sideways. I want those of you who think I am unreasonable to consider how this went down: I posted a photo of my watch last night and said I might be selling it soon. I didn't post the ebay listing here, nor did I ever plan to. There were a few members who were interested in the watch. Jump to today when I get home from work and click on that thread only to see this series of HUGE blown up images of my watch...at least it appeared to be my watch. The comments were not so much about hands but about this scratch matching that scratch...and bezel imperfections...and some other seller who posted photos of the watch years ago. What I saw was my watch being hyper scrutinized because it appeared to be the same as another member's watch. I honestly couldn't figure out what was happening. I saw only one comment about the hands. I thought I'd had the watch 10 yrs...maybe it was 5 or 7...and I think it came from chrono24. I honestly thought the hands were original, but I am no expert on this ref.

So to those of you who were reading the posts one at a time as they were posted, it probably didn't seem like anyone was attacking, but to me walking into all those images and discussion of another owner...it looked pretty ugly. I know it's a good watch, and hands are common service items on any vintage. They can be replaced. I'm asking you to see the event from my perspective, as a guy who knew he had done nothing wrong or deceptive. I think there was definitely an undercurrent of "is this guy trying to put something over on us" or "is this the same guy using two names with the same watch"? It definitely looked that way to me. Otherwise, it was all just about whether or not the same watch has been owned by two people. That wouldn't wouldn't seem to require the HUGE photos showing each tiny scratch or nick.

I'm sorry for being defensive. Maybe I'll stop by next April.