Community Stories

Newby Question RE: Seamaster Identification

B
Posts
51
Likes
25
I have both a 1947 Automatic “pre-caliber” and a 1952 Caliber 342. I can understand why my earlier watch simply says “Omega Automatic” but if the Seamaster was introduced in 1948 why doesn’t my (and many others) later watch say “Omega Seamaster Automatic”?
 
X350 XJR
Posts
13,483
Likes
31,777
Sorry I have no idea what you mean by “pre-caliber”?

We think much better here with pictures.
Edited:
 
Kwijibo
Posts
1,889
Likes
2,285
Most Seamasters are/were automatic. A few models were not. if it's automatic, it's written on the dial if not automatic not written. "Pre caliber" doesn't mean mcuh...
I think you are mixing to things. Omega didn't stop making handwinding mechanism to make automatic ones.
 
B
Posts
51
Likes
25
Hello, thanks for your replies. I’m still learning the nomenclature. And yes I understand that some Seamasters were manually wound and others automatically wound. Thanks for bearing with me. My 1947 watch is automatic Reference 2436-6 with Caliber 28.10 RA SC.PC movement. By saying “pre-caliber” I meant before Omega started numbering them such as “342” which is the movement that my 1952 watch has. That watch is Reference 6516.
 
image.jpg image.jpg
padders
Posts
10,440
Likes
16,324
Watch 1 looks to have been redialled so all bets are off. Watch 2 looks original and very pretty.
 
Kwijibo
Posts
1,889
Likes
2,285
it does not really work like that even if I understand what you mean.
your watches must have bumpers movements.
globally speaking, before 1950 the calibers name were their sizes (28.10/30 and so on) and after they had numbers.
Bumpers movement are "transitional" they both bear sizes and name like your 342
Edited:
 
padders
Posts
10,440
Likes
16,324
Kwijibo Kwijibo
it does not really work like that even if I understand what you mean.
your watches must have bumpers movements.
globally speaking, before 1950 the calibers name were their sizes (28.10/30 and so on) and after they had numbers.
Bumpers movement are "transitional" they both bear sizes and name like your 342

The change to the 3 digit naming scheme was 1947-48. There are no 2576 or 2577s for instance, which are recognised as one of the very first Seamasters if not in fact the very first which don’t have a 3 digit movement.
 
Kwijibo
Posts
1,889
Likes
2,285
transition 28.10RA and 330 in 1948 (for Seamasters) same movement with different names.
 
B
Posts
51
Likes
25
Kwijibo Kwijibo
transition 28.10RA and 330 in 1948 (for Seamasters) same movement with different names.
Thank you in helping educate me. Regards, JB
 
X350 XJR
Posts
13,483
Likes
31,777
Simply put, neither of your references are Seamasters. Even after the introduction of the Seamaster many Omegas did not belong to a specific line, like Seamaster or Constellation. Reference 6516 is a simple non waterproof snap back case and reference 2436 predates the Seamaster as you are aware. Adding another layer, many Omegas sold in the US had their own unique cases and references, like your 6516.
 
B
Posts
51
Likes
25
X350 XJR X350 XJR
Simply put, neither of your references are Seamasters. Even after the introduction of the Seamaster many Omegas did not belong to a specific line, like Seamaster or Constellation. Reference 6516 is a simple non waterproof snap back case and reference 2436 predates the Seamaster as you are aware. Adding another layer, many Omegas sold in the US had their own unique cases and references, like your 6516.
Thank you for the clarification! Regards, JB
 
B
Posts
51
Likes
25
padders padders
Watch 1 looks to have been redialled so all bets are off. Watch 2 looks original and very pretty.
How about this (see below); does this dial look original? JB
 
694FA9D5-CE10-4312-BB1A-0DA0A1659C7C.jpeg
X350 XJR
Posts
13,483
Likes
31,777
Need a much larger photo.
 
Olhenry56
Posts
631
Likes
788
B BumperJB
does this dial look original?
Even if it is (I personally think so), it's in rough shape. I doubt it would add value to your watch, and I'd rather look at the current dial everyday than that, even if the current one is repainted (the photo is too blurry for be to draw conclusions about the current dial, but I'm not too experienced). That's just my opinion, though. Others may disagree.
 
X350 XJR
Posts
13,483
Likes
31,777
Original or not, why replace one unattractive dial with another? And are you sure this dial fits your watch, just because the movement is the same doesn't mean the dial is correct for your watch.
 
B
Posts
51
Likes
25
X350 XJR X350 XJR
Original or not, why replace one unattractive dial with another? And are you sure this dial fits your watch, just because the movement is the same doesn't mean the dial is correct for your watch.
Thanks all for your comments. I’ll also ask my watchmaker for his thoughts and recommendations. Regards, JB
 
B
Posts
51
Likes
25
Just a question for the group. Since everyone appears to agree that the current dial has been refinished it would also seem logical that for convenience the original hour markers would have been used. If so, since the replacement original dial has identical markers (and is also sub seconds style) it’d be reasonable to think that it is in fact what the watch would have been delivered with. I don’t find this simple style nor the amount of patina to be objectionable. My two cents.
 
sathomasga
Posts
744
Likes
1,393
B BumperJB
since the replacement original dial has identical markers

But it doesn't. Look at how the indices meet the sub-seconds dial.
 
4 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

R

Seamaster 300 - 1960's? newby questions

Rivercity Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
NotJackson
NotJackson
Posts
21
Views
2K
jshaw083

Question re: Seamaster font

jshaw083 Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
efauser
efauser
Posts
9
Views
15K
S

Newby question about a 2501.20

sailingjab1977 Vintage Omega Watches Help, Discussion and Advice
Archer
Archer
Posts
1
Views
3K