Hi folks,

I have recently ventured into the world of vintage Omegas, having received my Seamaster Cosmic last week. I was going to give it a while before purchasing another, but, as I’m sure you all know fine well, the thrill of the hunt is quite addictive!

Regardless, I am keen to pick up a nice Seamaster from the 50’s. I came across this watch on Ebay, and thought I’d run it by the forum once again before considering. Details below:

Seamaster cal. 501, most likely from 1956 as per the vintage database.

I wonder, what do you guys think of the patina present in the centre ring? The case also seems to have a few scratches. Other than this, all seems in order to me, unless I have missed anything glaring (which is certainly possible)!

Note - there are no movement photos available, though I have requested.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Cheers

 

I make a disclaimer in that I sometimes miss obvious defects or redial issues but, that said, this one looks fine to me, particularly with a signed crystal. Obviously we all have different views on how much patina we can tolerate

My only concerns are a lack of detail about service history and running (which probably means it’ll need a service, although I understand parts are readily available for 5** movements) and the price which, at £899, seems to me to be £300-400 more than I’d want to pay for an unserviced watch.

 

PS. Judging by the eBay entry, he’s dealing in (overpriced?) watches, so why isn’t he describing the service history (or lack of it), how it’s running and posting photos (without the need for you to ask?) It’s not as though it’s a front loader!

 

Other members may have different opinions, but I would move on and look for something better. Looking at the watch, I see a damaged dial, corrosion on the hands and a gold capped case with a lot of surface scratches. Hard to tell from these photos if the case has been polished. No photos of the movement would also concern me. Finally, £899 strikes me as pretty overpriced for this example. Remember that most of the value of a vintage watch is in the dial. Some patina is attractive, some is not. I don't find this dial to be attractive. .

 

Many thanks for the thoughts and opinions, much appreciated. I see that there is a fine line between a nice patina, and dial damage. Having pondered it I’m going to heed the advice and leave this one.

Onto the next hunt!

Cheers

 

I am always suspicious of listings where there is no available information re how the watch is running, alongside an absence of movement photos. As you say, there’s not really an excuse not to be able to get into this to take some. A bit too suspicious for me this time!