Hello all,

I have recently purchased an Omega Seamaster Professional 300m watch (full size) from Ebay. Serial number is 49567911 on case (behind 7 o'clock lug) and automatic movement cal.1111. Case reference is 168.1503.

I know early Seamaster 300m came with omega cal.1109. This watch has Omega cal.1111 which might belong to omega constellation or omega Seamaster 200m models.

Also 49567911 serial number belongs to 1985. Omega Seamaster professional 300m model was launched in early 90's, i guess.

Serial number on movement and case matches. Case reference on case back is also correct. Serial number belongs to mid 80's before the launch of this model. No information if Seamaster 300m ever came with cal.1111.

Pictures are attached for further study. Is this an original omega Seamaster professional 300m watch or a Franklin watch ?

Any help will highly be appreciated.

Regards,
Moeed

 

Something's not right there - that case number is for a case with a steel bezel insert, not an anodized aluminum style insert. Although this case reference was used with the Cal. 1111 movement, this one is not correct.

Cheers, Al

 

Many thanks for your expert advice Archer.

Could you please confirm, if Seamaster Professional 300m (168.1503) ever came with Cal.1111 ?

Watch serial number looks like mid to late 80's. Can i associate this serial number to Seamaster Professional 300m model ?

I am not bothered about anodized bezel insert. Is rest of the watch genuine and make sense ?

Regards,
Moeed

 

I already did.

The only way to confirm that is to get an Extract of the Archives from Omega.

Not really. As you noted the serial number appears to be too early for this watch.

 

@moeedmughal I think what Archer is saying (and from the info you provided as well) is that while the case belongs to a watch that used the cal 1111, your bezel came from another watch since this case should have a steel bezel insert, and your movement may have come from an older watch than this model even though it’s the right caliber for this case number.

This is what people refer to a frankenwatch - it’s not simply just a cosmetically modded watch but rather it’s had the movement replaced as well. If you believe the watch starts with the movement, not the case, then this movement has had the case, dial, hands, and bezel replaced.

Based on the poor quality and lateral placement of the matching serial number engraving on the case, @Archer, which scenario above do you think fits this watch?

 

And I could be wrong about everything after the 1st paragraph.

 

As you yourself noted:

I have to say...............

 

So in summary: wrong movement, wrong bezel, fake serial badly applied to lugs to match wrong movement, mould on hands. Not exactly a keeper.

If you want to throw good money after bad get an extract. I guess there is a 1% chance it was a pre-production prototype which would explain some of the above but by far the most likely scenario is a Franken.

 

Actually, more of a keeper than a seller, because having to disclose what's wrong to a buyer would be more trouble than it’s worth. At least from the outside, without looking at case numbers and serial numbers it looks like a proper mid-late 90's Bond Watch (superluminova dial doesn’t match the early serial number either).

 

PS: The late 90's Seamaster Pro Luminova dials had a tendency to age and develop a patina similar to the older Tritium dials, although this didn't happen to either of our 1998 (56 million SN) SMP Bond Quartz watches.

 

Not really - the tritium dials did though...

 

I’ve seen a lot of 1997-1999 SMP with patina on the luminous markers and like this dial the didn’t indicate Tritium. Did they use tritium without marking the dial? or did the dials get damaged by moisture?

 

Yes.

 

Tritium was used up to the end of 1997, there were never any 'T's shown on these regardless of material. I have never seen an S-L dial with any noticeable degradation other than via water damage. Occasionally it can take on a slight grey cast but that is about it, even then it still glows fine. The earlier tritium dial SMPs like that shown above go a not all that attractive orangey beige, the hands less so. I would hazard a guess that the 97-99 watches you refer to were in fact 93-97 models and thus had degraded tritium not S-L.

 

Is the 168.1503 (SS case with steel bezel insert) also associated to the caliber 1109? I have seen a couple of SS Seamasters with caliber 1109 and 168.1503 marked case backs so seems like that case was used with more than one movement style.

This one, for example (Seamaster Professional 1994 Olympic edition, reference 2832.21.XX ; https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/watch-omega-seamaster-olympia-2832-21-xx) has the steel bezel insert you referred above and runs on caliber 1109 according to Omega

 

Yes

 

Thanks Al !

 

Hi everbody.

I don't know, if this thread is still current. I have the same issue and can clarify this whole topic. I have the Omega Seamaster 300m Pro, reference 2531... , Bond watch, same as Moeed, case number 495672xx, cal. 1111. And i had the same Questions. So i send to Omega for Service. And they approve me the authenticity of the watch. Its an early 1993 model in the transition from Pre Bond to the 300m. In this transition some of the 300m got an 1111 calibre. So this is an extreme rare model of the Seamaster 300m Pro. Finally approved from Omega Service Center in Germany.
Hope i could unveil the things for you in Satisfaction.

The only difference between my Omega and this from Moeed is that my case number is in the right place.

Regards,
Mathias

forgot to say. The lists in the internet about the Omega serial numbers and the belonging years are wrong. 49xxxxxx Omega Seamaster 300m is from 1993.

 

Hi Mathias,

Thanks a lot for your response. I still have this Omega and i am enjoying it. Thanks to share this information which is much needed reassurance for me.

I hope you will enjoy your Omega Seamaster Professional for years to come.

Regards,
Moeed

 

It's not a super luminova dial.
Sometimes it's really bad, what people telling here.
I think you said luminova because of the missing T, but that was never the case on that model. It all appeared with swiss made.