Omega Seamaster 1000m “Grand” Ref. 166.093 - final observations before listing

Thanks to everyone following along and for the thoughtful comments so far.

For now, the watch remains strictly documented as found. I’m continuing with detailed photography, comparison to known period references, and quiet consultation with a small number of specialists familiar with early Ploprof production. I’m also grateful for input shared by experienced collectors here, as well as insights from qualified watchmakers, which help frame the research responsibly.

My intention is to build as complete and transparent a picture as possible before considering any next steps. Once there’s something more coherent and properly substantiated to share, I’ll post an update here.

I really appreciate the collective knowledge and interest in this piece.

Fair question, and I understand how it might come across.

To be clear, I’m not marketing the watch here. By “final observations,” I simply mean completing basic as-found documentation: consistent photography, checking known period variations, and resolving a few open technical points so the record is accurate. None of this changes the watch itself.

Once that’s complete, there’s nothing further to debate here.

To be fair I have a feeling it's a modded (reversed) PloProf 1000 with the wrong (or painted) hands. I got two 600s myself and am now extensively studying for the 1000. This isn't something that makes my heart beat faster. And the language is if an LLM is speaking, sir.

Also, someone made a comment about the crown not being straight, this you said it wasn't true. In your other topic you made it clear the crown came off and in the photo's its clear.

Thanks for the comments, fair points.

To be clear, I’m not presenting this as rare or exceptional, nor implying any special significance. If my wording suggested otherwise, that wasn’t the intention.

By “as-found documentation” I simply mean establishing a baseline record of the watch in its current state; photographs, condition notes, and comparison against known period variations. Nothing beyond that.

Regarding the crown: you’re right to flag the photos. The crown had been removed during handling and appears both on and off the case; I should have been clearer there.

I’m very aware that many SM1000 examples exist, including modified or mixed pieces, and I’m not positioning this one outside that context. The goal here is simply to document before any intervention and invite correction where appropriate.

Happy to discuss specifics.

Definitely using AI to construct forum posts.