Forums Latest Members
  1. Omega78 May 29, 2013

    Posts
    154
    Likes
    169
    Dear respectable members, kindly give opinions my newly purchased Seamaster.
    The bracelet no is 1162/172.
    Thanks in advance
    Best regards,
    Lukmin Ko
    IMG_0723.JPG IMG_0724.JPG IMG_0726.JPG
     
    IMG_0727.JPG IMG_0728.JPG IMG_0730.JPG
  2. Privateday7 quotes Miss Universe May 29, 2013

    Posts
    5,753
    Likes
    2,903
    Ah bro Lukmin, you are the one who get it from Fikar.............
    Nice one bro :thumbsup:
     
  3. Omega78 May 29, 2013

    Posts
    154
    Likes
    169
    Thanks bro Herianto:)
    I bought it from Reza.
    Any idea how many pieces ever produced by Omega this "prototype"?
    Could not find a lot of information from google :confused:
     
  4. Melhadary May 29, 2013

    Posts
    617
    Likes
    989
    Oh yes... the illusive "tachymeter-less" 176.001! This one is in very nice condition, good catch [​IMG]

    Don't know about how many were produced, but I believe this prototype of the later numbered 176.007 was only produced for 4 months only beginning of '72.

    There was even a transitional production with a tachymeter, which had the 176.001 crossed out on the case back inside and an additional engraving of 176.007 done below it.

    Another part of this watch's "allure" is the very rare 170/653 bracelet/links combination... currently extremely hard to find, and replaced usually with the 1162/172 combination.
     
    Omega78 likes this.
  5. Omega78 May 29, 2013

    Posts
    154
    Likes
    169
    So, that's the reason why I see some ref 176.001 with the tachymeter bezel?

    Thank you for the additional info. I appreciate it very much.:thumbsup:
    Best regards,
    Lukmin Ko
     
  6. Melhadary May 30, 2013

    Posts
    617
    Likes
    989
    Honestly, I've never seen one with a tachymeter that has ONLY 176.001 as case reference. All I've seen have the 176.001 crossed out, and also have the 176.007 engraving. The caseback in the example(s) you have seen may have been changed...
    Another mystery to this watch, huh!
     
  7. Omega78 May 30, 2013

    Posts
    154
    Likes
    169
    Err... how about this one??:unsure: http://www.chrono24.com/en/omega/om...--id2405906.htm?id=2405906&picnum=14&tab=pics

    Best regards,
    Lukmin Ko
     
  8. Melhadary May 30, 2013

    Posts
    617
    Likes
    989
  9. Omega78 May 30, 2013

    Posts
    154
    Likes
    169
    Ok, got it. Thanks a lot.:thumbsup:
    Best regards,
    Lukmin Ko
     
  10. Melhadary May 30, 2013

    Posts
    617
    Likes
    989
    Personally, I am not really fond of the 70's look on watches, but something about the shape and combination of silver and blue on these ones was very attractive to me. I just picked up a 176.001/7 myself :)
    $(KGrHqV,!lsF!fmK(O04BRcMmyEsBQ~~60_3.JPG $T2eC16d,!zUE9s38+qPWBRiHD!!HYw~~60_3.JPG $(KGrHqN,!mEFBO3mqS3wBRiHEjG8MQ~~60_3.JPG $(KGrHqF,!qUFF60bGnbgBRiHE,vvRQ~~60_3.JPG $T2eC16h,!)QE9s3HG+b2BRiHEp5Qg!~~60_3.JPG
     
    NT931 likes this.
  11. Omega78 May 30, 2013

    Posts
    154
    Likes
    169
    Whoa, overall yours is crispier than mine::love::

    Did you notice there's difference between our minute hand??
     
    IMG_0732.JPG
  12. Melhadary May 30, 2013

    Posts
    617
    Likes
    989
    Yes.. actually yours is the original minute hand style for this model.
    My purchase was quite a good deal for a "daily beater" and I know it was generally serviced & polished, and most probably the hands replaced, so your example is most likely in more original condition than this one.
     
    Omega78 likes this.