Omega Seamaster 300

Posts
3
Likes
2
I’m after some help please, this is my late fathers pride & joy seamaster which he purchased in the mid 1960’s.
Can someone help me with identifying the specific model please? The serial number is 165024-64, when searching online I can only seem to locate a 165024 serial number. Although the watches with that serial number are nearly identical the hands differ and so does the ‘big triangle’ where the 12 should be??? Sadly the movement is broken and I have been quoted £2200 to repair. Is someone able to provide me with a rough valuation so I can see if it is worth getting the repair done sooner rather than later. Many thanks in advance.
 
Posts
417
Likes
1,043
Plenty of folks will be along to offer much more help shortly, but: the 165.024 number is its reference number, not the serial number.

The watch's value is tricker: the hands have been replaced or relumed; it's hard to say (as you note, this should have a sword hour hand, given it is a big triangle at 12). Again: many more experts will be along shortly. Hope you find a good way to enjoy it.
 
Posts
11,189
Likes
19,622
The reference is 165.024 with a sub reference -64. I might be wrong but I wouldn’t expect to see a big triangle dial on a -64 but again, don’t take that as gospel.
In the current market I’d say it’s worth maybe £3000 give or take.
Who quoted £2200? I’d advocate sending this to Swiss Time Services for a quote.
 
Posts
7,826
Likes
56,861
What did the watchmaker say the movement needed? $2200 would almost buy another 300
 
Posts
388
Likes
336
I would be suspicious of the motives of the watch repairer who over-quoted you at 2200 quid. I would suggest going to a different person when its time to get the work done.
 
Posts
3,714
Likes
8,428
Whoever gave you that quote for repair is, I suspect, going to send it to an Omega repairer and then keep the balance as their broker fee. Serial will probably be in the 24mil range. The thing that interests me is that I didn't think the BT was a thing on a -64? I would like to see a clear photo of the 3, 6 & 9 and the movement.
 
Posts
596
Likes
545
I would not profess to be an expert on these but I question what has happened to the Lyme paint on the dial. The paint seems to be very irregular and “messy “. It could be due to some lume loss but it doesn’t like other examples I have seen. I would also agree that the hands don’t match but the fact that they are baton rather than sword would not bother me as I believe they are correct.

Finally STS is a good call for a quote for repair.
 
Posts
16,135
Likes
44,455
Welcome @Vixter05 - as Wes said, the 165.024 is the model reference number. To answer your question directly- depending on variables like condition of every detail on the watch and originality- they can be worth anywhere from £6-12k- but the market can be very fickle. Your dial isn’t in the best of shape, hands have been relumed, case may have seen a polish/rebush at some point (can’t tell from the pics) and bracelet isn’t original- so yours probably resides towards the lower middle part of that range.

For service in the UK, contact Simon Freese

http://www.simonfreesewatchmakers.com/

He has a great reputation specifically working with vintage Omega and is know for his quality and integrity. Service price will be no where near what you were quoted.

The dial looks original but the hands were relumed at some point (which was pretty common as the lume could dry out and fall out of the hands). If Simon doesn’t do reluming he could send the hands off to James Hyman to do them to match the dial.

https://www.alchemistrelumer.co.uk/

If you value this as a family heirloom, then resale value isn’t of much concern- but you wouldn’t be throwing good money after bad.

If you just want to sell it, then don’t do anything to the watch, keep it as is and you will probably have received a few PM’s from this post offering to buy it already.
 
Posts
2,079
Likes
4,380
it's hard to say (as you note, this should have a sword hour hand, given it is a big triangle at 12).
Wrong!
Hands relumed: yes!

The "stetz"-dial (1968):

Edited: