Omega Seamaster De Ville

[nvdv]

Hi all,

Been eyeing this seamaster de ville for a bit and have opportunity to purchase for around 400USD - it was originally purchased in 1966. Watch supposedly comes with certificate but not much look in finding anything about the reference 14771 with cal. 552 and apparently 18K gold.

Any thoughts most welcome

 

[SOG53]

Better closeup photos needed that can be magnified
looks gold plated not 18K with steel caseback

 

[Gav1967]

I thought cal 552 is a time only movement (No date).

Also a quick Google of omega 14771 returns exclusively time only watches

So the watch you have pictured is not a 14771, it is not a cal 552 and as already mentioned almost certainly not 18k gold.

Apart from that it's perfect 😀😕

Edited: Aug 15, 2023

 

[nvdv]

Gav1967

I thought cal 552 is a time only movement (No date).

Also a quick Google of omega 14771 returns exclusively time only watches

So the watch you have pictured is not a 14771, it is not a cal 552 and as already mentioned almost certainly not 18k gold.

Apart from that it's perfect 😀😕

thank you for taking the time to reply and educating me. Appreciate it!

 

[SOG53]

Maybe 166.020 withe 563 movement? I wouldn’t buy it at this point without seeing movement and inside Caseback it’s a front loader so requires watchmaker to open

 

[Dan S]

You are not likely to get movement pictures for a watch in a unishell case. It's neither solid gold nor gold plated, but a gold-capped case on stainless. The photos are too small and blurry to judge condition, but if the dial is clean and it is running, $400 is a fair price, IMO. I wouldn't worry too much about the details of the reference and caliber, the seller probably just has it wrong and those details don't affect the price significantly.

 

[Gav1967]

Dan S

I wouldn't worry too much about the details of the reference and caliber, the seller probably just has it wrong and those details don't affect the price significantly.

I would normally agree but, in this instance, the OP has indicated the seller is providing papers ("certificate") with the sale.
in which case either the seller has accidentally misquoted the paperwork or the paperwork is not for this watch and the seller either knows this fact or not.
Think I would be initially suspicious because of this.

 

[Dan S]

Gav1967

I would normally agree but, in this instance, the OP has indicated the seller is providing papers ("certificate") with the sale.
in which case either the seller has accidentally misquoted the paperwork or the paperwork is not for this watch and the seller either knows this fact or not.
Think I would be initially suspicious because of this.

If the seller were asking a premium price for a valuable high-end reference, then maybe this would be a concern. But it's an entry-level piece and the price is fair regardless of the papers. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it.

If the correctness of the papers is critical for the OP, then I guess he will need to get more information, but for a watch like this, I wouldn't care. And if he doesn't buy it, someone else will.

 

[Bruce235]

Despite the blur, I think "Seamaster" is wrong. Good chance it is a redial. A proper photo is needed to confirm.

 

[Alpenschneerot]

Hello,if you do not purchase the watch,I am interested!
Cheers,Reiner