Forums Latest Members

Need advice on authenticity of a Seamaster 166.010, cal. 565

  1. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    Hello all, I am new to the forum and am looking to buy my first Omega. I have always wanted an Omega mainly because I felt that it was the only name missing from my dad’s collection, which he has passed to me since, according to him, he no longer needs to look at the time when he retired.

    My current means, however, only allow me to shop in the vintage market. I have done some research, but am far from being knowledgeable and have zero experience with Omegas. I have joined this community with the hopes of expanding my knowledge on the subject.

    I am looking at what seems to be a vintage non-chronometer Seamaster 166.010 with BoR bracelet. According to the seller, the movement is a caliber 565 (please excuse the photos, they were provided by the seller) with quickset date by turning the hands from 9pm to 12pm. Item is not yet on hand and, while i have somewhat committed to buying it, I have not yet made payment. The seller is asking a little under $600.00 for it.P

    From what I am able to see, everything looks okay on the outside. The case looks unpolished, the patina looks even, and the script looks finely printed. I am, however, a bit concerned about the condition/correctness of the movement: 1) the Ranfft website shows that the jewel stamp of the 565 should be on the lower part of the bridge (i assume that the middle part was usually reserved for indicating adjusted positions on the chronometer versions?), and the rotor should have an “O” under the company name; 2) the movement looks more like a 562, except that the rivets flanking the jewel stamp should be jeweled; 3) if those aren’t jewels, then the movement would be a 17-jewel 563 (except that 563’s should say “unadjusted”) or 560 (except that 560’s don’t seem to have a quickset date function; 3) did the non-chronometer 166.010 come with movements other than 565, 563, and 562?; 4) is it possible that this is a 565 with replacement bridge and rotor? A 562 with missing jewels? Or a 563 with a replacement bridge? Or is it a different movement altogether?; and, 5) notwithstanding all the foregoing, does the movement look clean and can it be restored with original parts? Or, if not, is the movement worth keeping as it is? The seller says that the watch works fine and has been keeping good time.

    To be honest, I am quite enamored with how the watch looks. And from what I understand, the 166.010 is quite hard to find outside of ebay (frankly, i am terrified of the bay). It is a bit unfortunate that i stumbled upon this while thinking about my first vintage Omega, because now I can’t think of any other reference that I would want more than this.

    What do you guys think? Any opinion (or criticism) would be most welcome.

    Thanks.

    -LE

    (Photos to follow)
     
    Edited May 2, 2019
  2. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    Photos
     
    2608165E-AE0D-4690-8F23-505D50B6D300.jpeg 4BCD311B-A2F1-4E11-9400-D8E0E12BEE37.jpeg 87843233-49EA-4892-9DF8-12E7A6A88B7B.jpeg C0253413-7A39-4E60-AF11-14AB838E00ED.jpeg 0DBA18D3-998D-4F09-834F-9A8F550B2F74.jpeg 6F9739F5-AC5B-444B-942C-C957EF799A6F.jpeg
  3. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
    Looks a bit like a tired watch. Bubbling on the dial. Movement needs a service. Bor is nice though. Do you have more pictures of the movement?
     
  4. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    Unfortunately, no. The seller is reluctant to open it again because, according to him, he doesn’t have the tools. He has pictures of other watches where the escapement and the caliber stamp are shown, though.

    It is my belief that he simply does not know how to do a proper movement shot, and took this one when he had the watch looked at by his watchmaker.
     
  5. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
    "Ranfft website shows that the jewel stamp of the 565 should be on the lower part of the bridge (i assume that the middle part was usually reserved for indicating adjusted positions on thechronometer versions?"

    Yes, this is remarkable. I would have thought the 24 jewels positition is lower on the 565 while the cal 562, 552 have them in the middle...
     
  6. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
    Extra pictures of the movement are needed IMO to make a good judgement. Did'nt the 166.010 came also with a 562?
     
  7. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
  8. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    Yes, I believe it did, and was actually chronometer grade but did not say so.

    Should I be looking elsewhere? Or is this worth a shot?
     
  9. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
    Chronometer was 564
     
  10. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
  11. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
    Chronometer is the 168024 with cal 564
     
    Screenshot_20190502-180901_Gallery.jpg Screenshot_20190502-180907_Gallery.jpg Screenshot_20190502-181017_Gallery.jpg
    ChrisN likes this.
  12. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
    Crown looks wrong
     
  13. Passover May 2, 2019

    Posts
    1,854
    Likes
    2,528
    166.010 is a nice reference!

    I also bought some of them recently.

    I can't comment on the movement question but I think the watch is in original condition. I looks all consistent including the moevment.

    The crown question has already been discussed here and I recall that both crowns -including yours- have been used on this reference. https://omegaforums.net/threads/my-latest-acquisition-an-omega-seamaster-166-010.50863/

    I think for 600 Dollars you could get one with a better dial.
     
    Lotus_Eater8815 likes this.
  14. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    Yes, my apologies, the chronometer is indeed 564. Thanks for the pictures. Now I really want a watch like this one!
     
    Passover likes this.
  15. Shabbaz May 2, 2019

    Posts
    4,898
    Likes
    17,858
    It's a great model. I had a couple. But i would wait for a better one. Some extra inspiration
     
    Screenshot_20190408-212218_Gallery.jpg 20180121_104738.jpg 20180220_145211.jpg 20180404_083716.jpg 20171121_140528.jpg 20180928_161642.jpg
    jeppehh, DaveK, JwRosenthal and 5 others like this.
  16. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    That was actually the thread I meant when i mentioned some models with a similar crown as mine :) it is also the thread that made me green with envy. Lol
     
  17. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    I will try and ask the seller for more pics of the movement, if only to solve the mystery and for my peace of mind.
     
  18. Passover May 2, 2019

    Posts
    1,854
    Likes
    2,528
    I have an incoming crosshair like the one in the thread but I took a gamble on it - hope it turns out to be a good one...
     
    ChrisN and Lotus_Eater8815 like this.
  19. ChrisN May 2, 2019

    Posts
    2,218
    Likes
    4,756

    The 565 quick sets by pumping the crown from position 2 (time set) to position 3. Your watch probably has a 562 - the same as the 166010 I sold here. It (semi) quick sets by cycling between 9pm and midnight as the seller says. There is a link in my sales listing to the service document I made for that watch and you can compare the movements. Your one is desperately in need of a service but, it might come up okay. I think those are jewels that your seeing next to the "24 jewels" writing - they are just very, very dirty.

    If the BOR is in good condition, $600 doesn't seem too unreasonable (a bit high but the BOR could be worth $150 on its own) although, expect to add at least half that for a service/parts. Depends on the dial really as if it is spotted badly then I'd steer clear. The problem is these sort of watches with dirty/neglected movements can be real money pits so, you're taking a big chance...

    Cheers, Chris
     
    Passover and Lotus_Eater8815 like this.
  20. Lotus_Eater8815 May 2, 2019

    Posts
    284
    Likes
    331
    So my watch looks like it has all correct and original parts but, with a tired movement and bubbling on the dial, I should be waiting for a better specimen?