Omega Seamaster 300 2913-3

[quadrafan]

Just hoping for a bit of advice. Proud owner of this 1958 Seamaster 2913-3 501 cal', sold in Gibraltar. There seems to be some question over hands and bezel. I have Omega's Certificate of Authenticity but not keen on paying £800 plus to find out its history, etc. Lovely, rare, Tropicalisation on the face and I believe the bezel to be original, how does one know? I know some early models came with the straight hands not the broad arrow hands. Lollipop second hand is fantastic. I bought this and a Tudor Submariner, Mk 2, 1964 from a Deceased Estate, evidently both watches sat in a drawer for many years. What do you all think?

 

[calalum]

Hands on the SM look like replacements, but I am not an expert.

 

[Dan S]

Bezel should be slightly concave, IIRC.

 

[jumpingsecond]

Hour /min Hands look like hands from a 165014 and both those + lollipop look newer than the dial. Bezel could be original but hard to tell from those pics. Overall though it looks attractive I think its a cool find at an estate sale.

 

[southtexas]

Tudor dial is a few years younger than the case, and the insert doesn’t look right either. But those are some awesome estate sale finds. Well done.

Edit: Tudor bracelet looks odd also, but might just be the one photo.

 

[PerJ]

southtexas

Tudor dial is a few years younger than the case, and the insert doesn’t look right either. But those are some awesome estate sale finds. Well done.

Edit: Tudor bracelet looks odd also, but might just be the one photo.

Tudor looks fine. Insert is the rare ’skinny 4’ which you only see around 1963/64.

 

[southtexas]

T Swiss T (no underline) is correct that early, in a PCG case?

Edited: Jan 14, 2024

 

[PerJ]

southtexas

T Swiss T (no underline) is correct that early?

It works in -64. Guessing serial is around 433xxx. This is just after the underlines. If I don’t recall wrong the silver print underlines (version before this one) are in a 409xxx serial batch.

It is transitional though so you could be right as it is a PCG. Normally these are non-PCGs. I didn’t even look to be honest as it said 1964 and dial, hands and insert are all 1964. Depending on serial it could be that it is earlier and had these parts replaced in 1964. Or that it is just a transitional watch. Not uncommon to find late Rolex underline subs in early non-PCG cases even if you always expect them to be in PCG cases. I would expect the same thing to occur with Tudor.

It be interesting to know the serial. Earlier than 409xxx and I would agree they have been changed.

Edited: Jan 14, 2024

 

[quadrafan]

Thanks all. I re-posted as I didn't see the Thread! DOH!

 

[quadrafan]

I have taken a few more snaps - definitely concave

 

[Dan S]

The bezel inlay looks convex to me. Perhaps one of the experts can comment. @kox

 

[kox]

Dan S

The bezel inlay looks convex to me. Perhaps one of the experts can comment. @kox

Agree, that's not an original concave inlay. From that angel it should look like the numbers 'bend inwards', like the below for instance.

 

[quadrafan]

Sorry convex!!

 

[quadrafan]

Ahhhh ok, I see what you mean. Do you think Omega would have re-placed it? Maybe I should bite the bullet and get a Service history from Omega at their exorbitant costs! which may answer the questions re; the hands as well.

 

[Dan S]

These inlays are very often damaged and restored.

 

[quadrafan]

Thanks Dan, any views on the Topicalised face anyone? I rather like it

 

[quadrafan]

PerJ

It works in -64. Guessing serial is around 433xxx. This is just after the underlines. If I don’t recall wrong the silver print underlines (version before this one) are in a 409xxx serial batch.

It is transitional though so you could be right as it is a PCG. Normally these are non-PCGs. I didn’t even look to be honest as it said 1964 and dial, hands and insert are all 1964. Depending on serial it could be that it is earlier and had these parts replaced in 1964. Or that it is just a transitional watch. Not uncommon to find late Rolex underline subs in early non-PCG cases even if you always expect them to be in PCG cases. I would expect the same thing to occur with Tudor.

It be interesting to know the serial. Earlier than 409xxx and I would agree they have been changed.

 

[quadrafan]

Defo' a PCG case. I will get my horologist to get the serial number for me - he serviced it recently. Always wanted a Rolex 5513 and this then came up. Job done.

 

[quadrafan]

PerJ

It works in -64. Guessing serial is around 433xxx. This is just after the underlines. If I don’t recall wrong the silver print underlines (version before this one) are in a 409xxx serial batch.

It is transitional though so you could be right as it is a PCG. Normally these are non-PCGs. I didn’t even look to be honest as it said 1964 and dial, hands and insert are all 1964. Depending on serial it could be that it is earlier and had these parts replaced in 1964. Or that it is just a transitional watch. Not uncommon to find late Rolex underline subs in early non-PCG cases even if you always expect them to be in PCG cases. I would expect the same thing to occur with Tudor.

It be interesting to know the serial. Earlier than 409xxx and I would agree they have been changed.

 

[quadrafan]

Hi,

As you guys are the experts please find details to clarify things.
Serial number 4099** ref' 7928 Rivet strap marked 7206 with 80 ends.
Hopefully this clears things up. I didn't know there were so many differences, very happy with the PCG case and the 'slim 4' insert, the bezel has 'ghosted' as well. All in all keeper - just love learning more.