Omega Seamaster 300 ref. 165.024 - Original Owner Watch Project with 552 Movement

Posts
238
Likes
265
I think this fits into my "incorrect, but awesome anyway", like I posted about a redial a bit ago. Sure, this is perhaps a franken, but for $1750 it is a super cool looking watch that I would wear the crap out of and not feel bad about it.
 
Posts
55
Likes
70
This is a parts watch. Serial is way to early for 165.024, CB casesback is late, Sd crown came also at very end of production... bezel off, hard to date the watch... would stay away, util you fell in love and desparete....
I'd happily agree to this if I thought that was the case. But actually, I don't! Admittedly though, I'm no specialist.......

As previously mentioned, either the movement or bridge have been replaced. But apart from that, it all seems to piece together and checks out You'll have to enlighten me on your theories please as I'd love to know more details and reasoning.

Bezel is good so not sure what you think is off with it? Matches one of the original known inserts perfectly and is good under UV and a microscope......

Crown is original and also ok for the date of the dial. Dial is all original. Caseback is original and has a service markings from 1976. Gasket had turned to sticky tar which actually pleased me as it means it hadn't been opened for an extremely long time! The filth under the bezel also proved this! Plexi is original and etched/marked. Bracelet also ties in.......

Elderly local lady brought it to my local jewellers as her husband had passed away. She still has the original purchase receipt which is being dropped in soon. She purchased it with her late husband and said it was his pride and joy.

I'm more than happy with it without even thinking about the cost of it. All good!
 
Posts
55
Likes
70
I think this fits into my "incorrect, but awesome anyway", like I posted about a redial a bit ago. Sure, this is perhaps a franken, but for $1750 it is a super cool looking watch that I would wear the crap out of and not feel bad about it.
Please see what I've just written. Regarding it being a Franken, what have you seen that I haven't apart from a bridge or complete movement swap? Either of which is not that uncommon......
 
Posts
238
Likes
265
J JW
Please see what I've just written. Regarding it being a Franken, what have you seen that I haven't apart from a bridge or complete movement swap? Either of which is not that uncommon......
I don't have experience/evidence that it is 'incorrect'/'franken' fwiw. I was going off of `Knudesen1971' (I see my quote got lost), and meant to say something like, 'if so, I think...'
 
Posts
161
Likes
135
for the price paid it is an awesome watch and anyone on this forum would snatch it at that price so no need to worry about the serial being too early. Maybe the movement was swapped at a later date but what you have now is a vintage seamaster 300 at a fraction of the price of a Watchco (which is a true franken)
 
Posts
55
Likes
70
for the price paid it is an awesome watch and anyone on this forum would snatch it at that price so no need to worry about the serial being too early. Maybe the movement was swapped at a later date but what you have now is a vintage seamaster 300 at a fraction of the price of a Watchco (which is a true franken)
Thank you.

Unfortunately nobody will ever know what exactly has happened during the life of this piece! And we all know that Omega back in those days used to use whatever parts they had available, perhaps even ranging over several years. So there will always be a degree of discrepancy on what is original to the watch and what may have been swapped after it's original construction.

I suppose that's part of the reason why researching the history of these things is so interesting. You just don't get that with modern to the same extent.
 
Posts
237
Likes
171
For 1750k GBP it is a good deal, even if you`ll part the watch, you will get it back...
The case seems like CB case with corresponding bezel, but the batton hands are mostly on the very early 1964 watches...movement is a i said even older...all parts are genuine Omega parts...Here is my oppinion on wath has happened: The watch started its life in cca 1968 as a CB cased 165.024 with non-screwd down crown.
The water has entered the watch in the crown tube area (hence the rotten 3 oclock index... jeweler has changed the hands and movement from some donor parts he had and changed the crown tube and crown to SD to prevent it from happening again... of course, just my expert guess! Enjoy, if you like it!
 
Posts
20,991
Likes
47,995
I think you should be very happy with it given the price, and given your low expectations for the watch, maybe there's no reason to pick the watch apart further. If you are interested in the origins of the various parts, I'm sure you can gradually develop deep knowledge and expertise about this reference. It may seem like you can become an expert in a few days by reviewing some websites, but usually there are nuances that take some time to appreciate.

As you know, parts can be authentic, but not matching, and most members are not going to go into detail about potential inconsistencies in a situation like this, because it would sound like they are beating up a watch that was purchased for a good price and as a project. If they sense that you are adopting a defensive tone in your responses, they are certainly not going to engage. I will just say that the mismatched serial number alone is already a major flaw for most collectors, and once an issue like that is identified, it's very likely that other changes have been made. Combined with the damaged dial, there would be no reason for a collector to study it further unless they were considering the value of the parts, and I can't imagine that anyone is interested in arguing with you about it. Almost everyone would probably just advise you to enjoy the watch and not overthink it.
Edited:
 
Posts
55
Likes
70
For 1750k GBP it is a good deal, even if you`ll part the watch, you will get it back...
The case seems like CB case with corresponding bezel, but the batton hands are mostly on the very early 1964 watches...movement is a i said even older...all parts are genuine Omega parts...Here is my oppinion on wath has happened: The watch started its life in cca 1968 as a CB cased 165.024 with non-screwd down crown.
The water has entered the watch in the crown tube area (hence the rotten 3 oclock index... jeweler has changed the hands and movement from some donor parts he had and changed the crown tube and crown to SD to prevent it from happening again... of course, just my expert guess! Enjoy, if you like it!

Thanks for your ideas. Really interesting. Did you spot something wrong with the insert or not??

And agreed, it was a very fair price. In fact, I'd have been happy to pay way more as I bought it, to try and bring back to life and enjoy. Not sell. Not right now anyway.

Also agreed on the baton hands. However, I have spotted them on some of the same reference way after '64' though. In fact , '66' and '68' pieces, so this always begs the question, how come/why?? Especially as they are rarer than the sword hands and therefore less easy to find if replacements need to be found.

Regarding the water damage theory, I'd come to the same conclusion because of the plot at 3 o'clock. However, I think that damage may be more recent than when the bridge/movement was first changed. Whether this watch was born with Naiad crown or screw-down, I don't know. But I think the damage happened after it's last service/repair work because when I opened it up, I could still see signs of some crystallisation on some of the parts, from dried salt/fresh water. And the crown was not sealed. Luckily though, apart from the lume plot rot, the dial surface and writing is absolutely perfect.

Really interesting building a representative picture/story about what actually happened to it. Just waiting for the original purchase receipt now. Fingers crossed!
 
Posts
55
Likes
70
I think you should be very happy with it given the price, and given your low expectations for the watch, maybe there's no reason to pick the watch apart further. If you are interested in the origins of the various parts, I'm sure you can gradually develop deep knowledge and expertise about this reference. It may seem like you can become an expert in a few days by reviewing some websites, but usually there are nuances that take some time to appreciate.

As you know, parts can be authentic, but not matching, and most members are not going to go into detail about potential inconsistencies in a situation like this, because it would sound like they are beating up a watch that was purchased for a good price and as a project. If they sense that you are adopting a defensive tone in your responses, they are certainly not going to engage. I will just say that the mismatched serial number alone is already a major flaw for most collectors, and once an issue like that is identified, it's very likely that other changes have been made. Combined with the damaged dial, there would be no reason for a collector to study it further unless they were considering the value of the parts, and I can't imagine that anyone is interested in arguing with you about it. Almost everyone would probably just advise you to enjoy the watch and not overthink it.

I'm very happy with it and it's still on my wrist. I'm also very keen to learn more about this reference and hone my knowledge. I've really enjoyed this one in particular, as it looked like such a pile of s**t to begin with!

Although originality is important to me and others, this watch clearly had something happen to it and it was fixed. I'm fine with that. If I really, really cared, I'd try and hunt down a bridge or movement with the correct numbers on it.

Thanks for your thoughts.
 
Posts
238
Likes
265
J JW
I'm very happy with it and it's still on my wrist. I'm also very keen to learn more about this reference and hone my knowledge. I've really enjoyed this one in particular, as it looked like such a pile of s**t to begin with!

Although originality is important to me and others, this watch clearly had something happen to it and it was fixed. I'm fine with that. If I really, really cared, I'd try and hunt down a bridge or movement with the correct numbers on it.

Thanks for your thoughts.

IMO, if the price and expectations reflect the originality of it, there is no shame in wearing something that is Franken/mixmaster/redial/etc. What you have is a stunning watch that is going to run great and feel great, that you didn't have to break the bank for. There is no reason to worry about it, just enjoy it!
 
Posts
15
Likes
12
It's a beautiful watch, and you have done a great job cleaning it up. Wear it with pride.
 
Posts
55
Likes
70
All the bits I'd ordered arrived today, so I took the watch apart again this evening to finish the restoration.

The easy bit was fitting a new case gasket and an 'O' ring inside the crown. Replacing the ball bearings in the case for the bezel to rotate on, not so!!!!

I got hold of some 0.9mm springs and some 1mm ceramic ball bearings. Then fiddled around for a while experimenting with the best way to get the little ba**ard things in place!! Once they were in place, I burred the holes over very slightly so they were secure.

Quite a few springs and bearings were lost forever and lots of swear words were muttered. However, it's done and the bezel rotates much nicer now. Possibly one of the fiddliest jobs I've ever attempted.

 
Posts
237
Likes
171
Good job! The original springs are shorter, so the montage is easier, I used a bit of lube to keep the ruby ball in place. Those parts are still available from Omega, just FYI. Mean those pink ruby ones, not the new white ceramic...or were, at least a year ago.
Edit: as per my knowledge, SD crown was a MoD conversion at first, some of the very late examples are factory SD crowns, but those are having SC (special case) stamping inside the caseback. Those are quite rare. All other are later service conversions.Talking about 165.024 only.
And yes, there was a small batch US market cal 550 with batton hands, serial range 27.11 from OCT1969.
Edited: