Omega SEAMASTER 135.003-62-SC

Posts
4
Likes
0
Hey there, I just got this watch and cracked it open and saw what looks to be a SEAMASTER 30 from around 1962-63 but there are no SEAMASTER engravings on the dial or the back plate. I was wondering if these were from a different watch or aftermarket parts. I would love the input I’m super curious.
 
Posts
185
Likes
477
" ...and saw what looks to be a SEAMASTER 30..."

and saw the reference, that stands for different executions from a watch, that also
can be a Seamaster
 
Posts
4
Likes
0
" ...and saw what looks to be a SEAMASTER 30..."

and saw the reference, that stands for different executions from a watch, that also
can be a seamaster
Please help me understand your comment. I have zero knowledge and want to learn more about this watch so any good informan will help..
 
Posts
185
Likes
477
evering is ok - it is a Omega

would be the dial Seamaster signed and the caseback Seamaster
engraved, it would be a Omega Seamaster
 
Posts
4
Likes
0
evering is ok - it is a Omega

would be the dial Seamaster signed and the caseback Seamaster
engraved, it would be a Omega SEAMASTER
So that means it’s not a seamaster, but now I’m curious what it would be classified as?
 
Posts
185
Likes
477
it is part of a merketing strategy to create different modell lines,
such as seamaster, constellation ...

these lines stands for different attributes, that are also vissible
for the clients by engravings ...

so the seamaster line for example stands for/suggested a higher value product,
as a "only" Omega basis product
 
Posts
4
Likes
0
it is part of a merketing strategy to create different modell lines,
such as seamaster, constellation ...

these lines stands for different attributes, that are also vissible
for the clients by engravings ...

so the seamaster line for example stands for/suggested a higher value product,
as a "only" Omega basis product
Understood. Thank you I appreciate the help
 
Posts
185
Likes
477
explanation for the TS:

bad dial - movement the part with most value. complete watch not more
 
Posts
543
Likes
1,009
evering is ok - it is a Omega

would be the dial Seamaster signed and the caseback Seamaster
engraved, it would be a Omega Seamaster
I don't think it's as clear cut at that. I also own a reference 135.003-62-SC that lacks both a "Seamaster" signature on the dial and a hippocampus on the caseback. Notwithstanding those deficiencies, Omega clearly identifies the watch as a Seamaster 30:

 
Posts
11,971
Likes
20,814
According to the Omega Vintage Database, ref 135.003 is a Seamaster.

It's not unheard of for some Seamasters and Geneves to have 'sterile' dials.
 
Posts
42
Likes
144
almost
I don't think it's as clear cut at that. I also own a reference 135.003-62-SC that lacks both a "Seamaster" signature on the dial and a hippocampus on the caseback. Notwithstanding those deficiencies, Omega clearly identifies the watch as a Seamaster 30:

I missed a beat because just last week I found and serviced this one: reference 131.002 - 62 - sc and I didn’t notice right away that the case was different😅.
 
Posts
543
Likes
1,009
It's not unheard of for some Seamasters and Geneves to have 'sterile' dials.
Both my watch and the OP's watch are Norman Morris OXG imports. That makes me wonder if sterile dials were exclusively or mostly for the US market.
 
Posts
42
Likes
144
Both my watch and the OP's watch are Norman Morris OXG imports. That makes me wonder if sterile dials were exclusively or mostly for the US market.
Mine is not! And I'm very confident there are no swapped parts because it was "pristine", with no signs of being opened (not even the case or scratches or marks on the screws and so on), very dry and stiff indeed. From what I understood, it was simply forgot in a drawer for decades in Italy.