I assume this is a redial. The lack of rings on the sub dials makes me think it not original. What do doe every one think? Would $2500.00 be to much? Comments?
https://www.blackbough.co.uk/product/omega-ref-101-010-gold-vintage-wristwatch-circa-1966-wwocgr/ Here is a picture of a non Seamaster 101.010 also a 1966 24,000,000 serial number
Hi incorrect signed dial, that watch is not a seamaster... A Seamaster implies some water resistance . Non screwback and Sq pushers.... This just from casual years ( 20 plus )of observation. Or dial replaced, with a NOS. dial from a another case ref... Anyone? Good Hunting Bill
I also see the arrow after "Taychymetre 60" lacks the detail as the post by @MSNWatch - What other parts of the OP sticks out the most as a redial? Appreciate the help. Thomas
I noticed the "S" as well but thought there was a difference in execution based on year. Quality is lacking now that I take a closer look. Absolutely, seeing it clearly. Thank you for pointing those other pieces out for me. I appreciate the information Thomas
There is a font / shape difference based on year. The 24 million serial number means the movement is from 1966 or 1967, which would make it the rounder S seen on Mike's / MSNWatch's dial. That sharper curved S (sometimes called a coat hanger S) wasn't used after 1962 or 1963.
Thank you all. Bill Sonhe and ulackfocus in particular. I new the Seamaster was a water resistant model but it completely slipped my mind to look for a screw on case back. I new there was font change through out the years but did not know the specifics about the coat hanger S being used after 1962. Would love a sticky on all the detail to look for when trying to determine whether a watch has a redial or if the watch has the original dial.