- Posts
- 7,159
- Likes
- 23,193
My Early Seamaster 120 Divers. What to look for and what to avoid.
- Posts
- 12
- Likes
- 1
vb
·Hi, can someone help me? I'm trying to get better at spotting fakes! In my opinion, the bezel, case, and crown are fake here. But the caseback and dial seem original? The movement isn't a 552, but I've read that the 550 was used on some models—is that true? Anyway, the serial number (17xxxxxx) seems a bit low for a late 1960s model, doesn't it? Thanks a lot for your answers!
- Posts
- 211
- Likes
- 686
KaiseRRuby
·@vb dial is also not original, based on how 120 is written.
Compare the dials, I see lots of differences. Mine is on the right.
Compare the dials, I see lots of differences. Mine is on the right.
Edited:
- Posts
- 13,153
- Likes
- 22,847
Davidt
·Hi, can someone help me? I'm trying to get better at spotting fakes! In my opinion, the bezel, case, and crown are fake here. But the caseback and dial seem original? The movement isn't a 552, but I've read that the 550 was used on some models—is that true? Anyway, the serial number (17xxxxxx) seems a bit low for a late 1960s model, doesn't it? Thanks a lot for your answers!
Well the case, caseback and bezel are certainly fake. The dial isn’t the typical fake dial we usually see but it does have issues so there’s a high likelihood it’s fake as well. Ultimately it doesn’t matter as so much of the watch is fake it’s a definite pass.
- Posts
- 12
- Likes
- 1
vb
·Hello, sorry for all these posts ! Found this one and it's look legit to me but i really need a feedback before go ahead! Thank you
- Posts
- 211
- Likes
- 686
KaiseRRuby
·Ah, the no-date. Cool one. I think the crown is off, bezel and dial look legit but the photos are not that crisp. Never seen that case back, my case back looks different then this one.
- Posts
- 111
- Likes
- 91
ZWD
·that one has been on ebay for a while.
Suspect caseback. Incorrect crown. Bezel is way worn down.
Suspect caseback. Incorrect crown. Bezel is way worn down.
- Posts
- 211
- Likes
- 686
KaiseRRuby
·And when I zoom in at the dial, I'm not positive. Strange font.
- Posts
- 13,153
- Likes
- 22,847
Davidt
·Hello, sorry for all these posts ! Found this one and it's look legit to me but i really need a feedback before go ahead! Thank you
Have you got an eBay link. The pictures are poor but in first glance it looks ok with the exception of the caseback but I’d like to see the original pictures.
It looks ok but smells fishy is perhaps a better way of putting it.
- Posts
- 12
- Likes
- 1
vb
·Have you got an eBay link. The pictures are poor but in first glance it looks ok with the exception of the caseback but I’d like to see the original pictures.
It looks ok but smells fishy is perhaps a better way of putting it.
- Posts
- 537
- Likes
- 964
KeyWestPaw
·In my experience. There's a lot of these out there and buying the seller is usually the best way to go if you're not keen to all the nuances of this watch (or any specific watch for that matter).
Find someone that does know more about it than you do and ask all the questions.
Buying from random websites like eBay or Chrono that you can't do the due diligence, is the first mistake.
I've been on different watch forums for many years and I've learned that patience when looking for a specific model is key I found seamasters and speedmasters that were 100% original, they came to me from people I've had nice conversations with that did the research, the due diligence, or knew the origination of the watch.
I've never purchased a vintage piece from any of the other sites. Too many frankenwatches out there.
I have bought pieces that I've known weren't original, but I knew which parts were not.
Buying vintage watches can be a nightmare.
Try to buy the seller first, or do a ton of research to find your dream watch.
Of course that's just my two cents.
Find someone that does know more about it than you do and ask all the questions.
Buying from random websites like eBay or Chrono that you can't do the due diligence, is the first mistake.
I've been on different watch forums for many years and I've learned that patience when looking for a specific model is key I found seamasters and speedmasters that were 100% original, they came to me from people I've had nice conversations with that did the research, the due diligence, or knew the origination of the watch.
I've never purchased a vintage piece from any of the other sites. Too many frankenwatches out there.
I have bought pieces that I've known weren't original, but I knew which parts were not.
Buying vintage watches can be a nightmare.
Try to buy the seller first, or do a ton of research to find your dream watch.
Of course that's just my two cents.
- Posts
- 211
- Likes
- 686
KaiseRRuby
·I have a question about my SM120. Bought it a couple of years ago and it had an official Omega service. This is it:
This photo show a lot of smudges and hairs, i took it under a real bright light.
These are on another bracelet (both original Omega and corresponding the watch age):
I know this watch is delivered with the 565 movement. But, mine is with the 561 movement. The watchmaker said: well, the watch is almost 60 years old, its quite possible someone just replaced the movement 50 years ago. Movements were easy to order, Omega wasn't that strict with parts back then, so maybe someone even liked the 561 more because of the COSC. We don't know. It was in there, we serviced it.
Is this a logical explanation? Or is it even possible that some 565 were equiped with the 561 movement? Its quite dull, because the quickset isnt working on the 561.
Happy to hear your responses!
This photo show a lot of smudges and hairs, i took it under a real bright light.
These are on another bracelet (both original Omega and corresponding the watch age):
I know this watch is delivered with the 565 movement. But, mine is with the 561 movement. The watchmaker said: well, the watch is almost 60 years old, its quite possible someone just replaced the movement 50 years ago. Movements were easy to order, Omega wasn't that strict with parts back then, so maybe someone even liked the 561 more because of the COSC. We don't know. It was in there, we serviced it.
Is this a logical explanation? Or is it even possible that some 565 were equiped with the 561 movement? Its quite dull, because the quickset isnt working on the 561.
Happy to hear your responses!
- Posts
- 757
- Likes
- 804
masteroftime
·100% swapped movement. I’m pretty sure a 561 would preceed the introduction of the model age wise.
- Posts
- 211
- Likes
- 686
KaiseRRuby
·100% swapped movement. I’m pretty sure a 561 would preceed the introduction of the model age wise.
Yeah, 561 is from 1958 and 565 from 1966.
Its not possible to see if movement and cases match somewhere right? There is no serial in case and on the movement that need to match, i mean.
Well, i already assumed it was a swapped movement, this just confirms. Does a swapped movement matter?
- Posts
- 13,153
- Likes
- 22,847
Davidt
·Could also just be a swapped bridge containing the cal number, resulting from damage to the original.
- Posts
- 211
- Likes
- 686
KaiseRRuby
·Could also just be a swapped bridge containing the cal number, resulting from damage to the original.
Yeah, basically there is just a little difference between the 565 and 561 as a movement, right?
- Posts
- 13,153
- Likes
- 22,847
Davidt
·Yeah, basically there is just a little difference between the 565 and 561 as a movement, right?
They’re the same base caliber but one is a chronometer and one isn’t. If you have pics it’s possible to say with more certainty whether the movement is a 565 with a 561 bridge or a full 561.
- Posts
- 6,254
- Likes
- 9,659
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersI have a question about my SM120. Bought it a couple of years ago and it had an official Omega service. This is it:
This photo show a lot of smudges and hairs, i took it under a real bright light.
These are on another bracelet (both original Omega and corresponding the watch age):
I know this watch is delivered with the 565 movement. But, mine is with the 561 movement. The watchmaker said: well, the watch is almost 60 years old, its quite possible someone just replaced the movement 50 years ago. Movements were easy to order, Omega wasn't that strict with parts back then, so maybe someone even liked the 561 more because of the COSC. We don't know. It was in there, we serviced it.
Is this a logical explanation? Or is it even possible that some 565 were equiped with the 561 movement? Its quite dull, because the quickset isnt working on the 561.
Happy to hear your responses!
As @Davidt says, it could be a swapped bridge - or an entire swapped movt.
561s don't have a quickset date, it has a 'semi-quickset' date function - i.e. through 12, back through 9, then through 12 again.
So, if it doesn't have a quickset date, as a 565 should have, it is more likely that the whole movt was replaced.
Yeah, 561 is from 1958 and 565 from 1966.
- Posts
- 13,153
- Likes
- 22,847
- Posts
- 211
- Likes
- 686
KaiseRRuby
·@Davidt and @Peemacgee thanks for your responses, they are helpfull in getting to know the watch more. I only have this not really clear photo of the movement:
I'm pretty sure i took more photo's somewhere in the past but i cannot find them.
I'm pretty sure i took more photo's somewhere in the past but i cannot find them.
