Hi Everyone, my first post here...

I am new to omega and have been after one of these for quite some time,
although this one has a few battle scars, I think it is a nice piece which I really like,
but would appreciate some honest opinions please.

Apologies for the poor quality photos, they were taken with my phone, ( these are the best ones! )...





Really sorry about this photo:


So, is it as genuine as I think it is?

Regards,

Enzo.

 

What are the chances of finding one where the color of lume is yellow... Color of lume is a little off putting IMHO... But beauty is in the eye of the beholder

 

Hi Enzo, yes your watch is real Ref. 165024, for the serial appears to be 66-67.

 

I think it's genuine.

 

Not sure that's a correct bezel for a 24.7xxx serial.
It looks more proper for 26.x serial
@kox knows a lot about the bezels.
Let's page him.

 

Thank you for your responses.
Sorry, I should have stated that I do not own the watch (yet), hence the poor pictures I took in a hurry.
The seller was very helpful and said I could take as many pics as I wanted in order to do some research.
I do agree that the lume colour is a little dirty, but it somehow has not put me off.
Will be interesting to hear if it is the correct bezel...
Many thanks once again,
Regards,
Enzo.

 

Well, regarding the bezel. @pitpro is right IMO. This type with "the closed five" and larger font is typically seen on serial 26.3x, .8x and .9x - that is 68 productions. But also on a few 27.x serials.
On serial 24.71x I would like to seen the type with "the horizontal one" (left one below) or at least "the open five" (right one below), the later most often seen on serial 25.x, but also on a few 24.x

24.71x is a spring 67 production.



But again, production of these 3 mentioned types are within a timeframe of about 24 months, so I'm not saying that the OP's bezel couldn't be correct/ original mounted for the serial and this watch.. I just don't think so ;-) But it's still a SM300 2. gen correct bezel and in pretty ok condition besides the nick at 20.
The lume on dial and hands not so much

Here's one of mine with serial 24.71x

 

@kox Here's a question for you.
Were all of the bezel types interchangeable between 165.024 and 166.024?
Were there any used on just one of the 2 types?
Are the serial periods each type was used consistent with both 165.024 and 166.024?
Nice work on the research.

 

Thanks...
...well, answers to those questions would demand a more precise guide to explain and distinguish the differences. I have promised that elsewhere and work is in progress ;-)
But yes, all of the 7+ types are interechangeable. Case design is the same. Or the bezel design and mounting (balls, springs etc.) is.
And yes, there were types only used on the 165.024. And most likely also on the 166.024.
Well, serial periods are what serial periods are, and of course there are those exceptions which drift. But yes, on the normal SM300 2. gen productions the serials towards the bezel type is somewhat consistent. The maverick is most often the military versions (W10 and RN300), which have some series that drift. And also some US productions. But otherwise it's pretty consistent IMO.

 

Looking forward to hearing which bezel(s) were only used on the 165.024.

 

Thank you very much for the bezel info, and for posting a pic, what a great looking watch! Love it. WRT lume on dial and hands, do you think this has just aged this way, in other words it is genuine, which some will like this 'dirty' colour and others won't?

 

The dial is absolutely genuine.
Many SM300 have green lume.
My theory is that moisture intrusion(not necessarily a leak)
caused the lume to turn green, a watch that was sealed
better, the lume turned mustard

 

Brilliant, thank you

 

A quick one then.....these three types below were the first one used, in a row from early 64 production, serial 20x and into 67 production.
And none of them were original delivered on the 166.024. Only 165.025 IMO.
The open and closed five ones along with the straight 1 types (3 of those) are more in the grey zone in regards to use on both the 16x.024's, military versions (165.024's) included.

 

I have heard that as an explanation too - apparently the pressure sealing crowns worked well at depth, but not so well in shallower waters, hence many instances of water damage.

 

Just wanted to say 'thank you' to those that responded here.
It gave me the confidence to go and make a purchase on a watch that I had 'liked' for a very long time, and am now proud to wear .
I did not buy the one I posted here, but very similar...I will take a few pics today and post in a new thread.
Thanks once again, Regards, Enzo.