Opinion on a SM300 - 165.024

Hi everyone!

I am considering selling my SM300 165.024, and I would like your honest opinion on the watch and what woud be a fair asking price. I do not have enough knowledge about vintage Omegas myself, so i would really appreciate your help.

It has a serial number starting with 19mill that should date it around 1962/63. Unfortunately i have no photos of the movement. It was last serviced in 2017 and it was said the movement was in good shape.

The dial and hands might have been relumed? The dial says "Swiss made", and there is a missing lume line between "30" and "40" on the bezel.

If needed i can take better quality photos with a camera.

Thanks!

You seem to have a very nice “first” version of the 165024 if looking at the bezel. The bezel looks to be in fantastic condition and that is very rare!

Your observations of the dial potentially being relumed is correct in my opinion. The lume on the SM300’s tend to wander a bit over time, these are over 50 years old now, but yours is a bit maybe too much “wonky” to be original? As well being a bit too puffy with air bubbles in them. Will post a comparison shot of my -64 so you can look closer at the lume between these two.

If you look closely on the candlestick hands, are they very slightly curved or straight? Straight hands are considered to be replacement service hands, and the green lume is more seen on the 70’ies versions of the SM300.

On a SM300 the price depends a lot on the complete watch including its movement, so prior to selling it order a Extract of the Archives from Omega to hopefully match the movement to your watch. A lot of SM300’s have had their movements swapped during service.

The crown looks to be a service replacement as well as the crystal.

And have the caseback opened by a professional watchmaker and take good pictures of it, and of the movement as well.

Also check this great site out:
https://www.omegaseamaster300.com/

Thanks, I appreciate your help!

The watch is dropped off at a watchmaker. I'll post pictures of the movement and caseback in a couple of days.

Your SM300 looks fantastic! I would say there is a difference between the two. Some of the hour markers on mine are more "puffy", and I would say the hands on mine looks straight.

I rarely observed that very first type bezel in that outstanding condition!
On the other hand, I think the case has been heavily polished:

Hi again!

Pictures of the movement and caseback:

Thanks!

Very interesting thread! The unmatching patina on the pieces is very similar to my watch.

How can you tell that the crystal is unoriginal?

Could the unmatching between the dial and the hands arise from the fact that the manufacturer of the dial was not the same one of the hands, thus slightly different materials were used?

Are the hands straight or slightly curved on OP’s watch? To me these look straight, that makes me think these are service hands from the seventies, from the same era the military 300’s show green lume on both hands and dials, as well as on speedmasters from this same era? I’m not arguing that there can’t be greenish lume on the early SM300’s.

Sufficient to check if it is Luminova or tritium. Very few relume with old tritium nowadays.
Expose to light, go in the dark, if it luminesce less than 30sec is old trtium (infact the zinc sulphide secondary scintillant). If light stays longer is Luminova and is a relumed dial.

New pictures!

I really can't tell if the hands are curved or straight. So here is a few more photos. Also of the barely visible omega logo on the crystal.

There is very clearly a difference in the luminescense between the hands and dial. The pictures lies a bit, there is a very weak glow from the dial after 30sec that the camera cant pick up.

The hands looks to be curved to me, looking at your pictures. The crystal looks original also, cool.