Forums Latest Members
  1. ivisga May 5, 2018

    Posts
    9
    Likes
    3
    Hello there guys, a little bit of context. I'm from México and I just recently bought a vintage OMEGA Automatic Seamaster which is a black dial but after researching online I found out that black dials are actually rare and even more a crosshair design so that raised some questions about my recent purchase. I already looked it up on the the OMEGA Vintage-Watches database but there are some inconsistencies between my watch and the one showed on the official site.

    What I already know
    1. The caliber number which is 565 as illustrated in one of the pictures (you can kinda see it if you zoom in and really pay close attention).
    2. Brand and series (d'oh!) which is OMEGA Automatic Seamaster.
    3. Model (kinda)? I think the model is the one displayed on the stainless steel back which is 166.037 but on the data base I can't find anything related to that particular model although the number 166.0037 looks particularly similar to mine, they also share the same cal. 565.

    Now, the inconsistencies
    1. Even though they look alike my timepiece has a black sphere.
    2. The case on the database is listed as stainless steel whereas mine is clearly gold plated (as stated on the back)
    3. The crosshair on the dial doesn't match the clean one on any of the ST. 166.0037 models

    I also need to state some things. I am by no means an expert on the field, I know little to nothing about the brand and their products so if anyone here is more knowledgeable than me (basically almost everyone on this forum) please let me know what you know about this particular model and why it doesn't match the one listed on the official database.

    Thank you in advance.
     
    1.jpg 2.jpg 3.jpg 4.jpg 5.jpg 6.jpg
  2. Davidt May 5, 2018

    Posts
    10,307
    Likes
    17,871
    Your pics aren’t great but I’m saying redial. The crosshair is slightly too thick and the minute markers appear inconsistent.
     
  3. Fialetti May 5, 2018

    Posts
    251
    Likes
    309
    Don't expect the Omega database to include every case and dial variant issued; that's not enough to rule this out.

    That said, I agree that this is a redial, for the same reasons stated above. Also, the crosshair seems misaligned, the paint seems too glossy, and I think there should be lume dots and and 'T' marking to go with those hands.

    Since this case reference was also issued as a Geneve and a Deville, and the only reference to its being a Seamaster is on the dial, I am not sure you can count on it originally having been a Seamaster.
     
  4. padders Oooo subtitles! May 5, 2018

    Posts
    8,931
    Likes
    13,869
    I work on the basic premise that if It is a black dial Omega from the 50s or 60s it is a redial. I realise there are straight genuine ones out there am not often wrong in with that basic assumption.
     
  5. Seaman May 5, 2018

    Posts
    239
    Likes
    461
    So except the redial it's a very nice watch..now depend how much did you pay for it..:)
     
    Jerseyhammer likes this.
  6. Davidt May 5, 2018

    Posts
    10,307
    Likes
    17,871
    Case is also rather worn and crown is wrong.
     
  7. X350 XJR Vintage Omega Aficionado May 5, 2018

    Posts
    12,424
    Likes
    29,477
    Sorry, I have to disagree, it looks like an original gilt dial to me.

    See how the SWISS MADE picks up the light in this photo, paint would not be reflective in this way.

    That being said, I agree the case is badly worn.

    6.jpg
     
  8. Davidt May 5, 2018

    Posts
    10,307
    Likes
    17,871
    Even with the way the crosshair appears to be off centre at 6 and the haphazard minute markers at 6?

    Do you think this is due to the crystal distorting it?
     
  9. X350 XJR Vintage Omega Aficionado May 5, 2018

    Posts
    12,424
    Likes
    29,477
    I think it's the photos.
     
    Davidt likes this.
  10. ivisga May 5, 2018

    Posts
    9
    Likes
    3
    Thank you for your answers guys. I know the case is badly worn but I paid only $200 USD for this piece that's what makes me think that this is probably a redial so I dunno. About those minute markers at 6 I don't think it's 'cos of the crystal, they are actually placed a little bit on the upper side. I'll be posting some more pics in a moment.
     
  11. ivisga May 5, 2018

    Posts
    9
    Likes
    3
    Well my cellphone won't focus sorry for the quality of those pictures.
     
    8.jpeg 7.jpeg
  12. X350 XJR Vintage Omega Aficionado May 5, 2018

    Posts
    12,424
    Likes
    29,477
    Let me clarify a common misconception about the Omega database, it's not a bible by any stretch of the imagination and it's far from complete. It lacks more information than it contains and is known to have errors as well. Typically it only lists one type of case when there are usually other versions as is the case with the OPs watch. So just because it says stainless steel for this reference that doesn't mean there aren't other possible versions as well.

    So, back to the dial, with those photos the cross-hair at 6 o'clock does seem off too much to be original.

    Wear it and enjoy it.
     
    ivisga likes this.
  13. dialstatic May 6, 2018

    Posts
    924
    Likes
    1,772
    Just as an alternative theory: the crosshairs are off at the 6 marker, and the space between the 29 minute and 6 is smaller than the space between 6 and 31 minutes.

    Could it just be that at some point the 6 o’clock hour marker came loose and it was re-applied too much to the right by an incompetente watchmaker?
     
  14. ivisga May 6, 2018

    Posts
    9
    Likes
    3
    Some more pics.
    Well I hope that's the case but for $200 USD that would be much to ask, I think it's already a sweet deal to have the original movement and case. If you pay close attention you can also see that the 12 marker is also misaligned.
     
    Jerseyhammer likes this.
  15. ulackfocus May 6, 2018

    Posts
    25,983
    Likes
    26,968
    I don't like the spacing and relatively high location of the SWISS MADE.
     
  16. dialstatic May 6, 2018

    Posts
    924
    Likes
    1,772
    Yeah, you’re probably right. Still, it’s not the worst redial I’ve seen, and it’s a nice watch - especially for the money.
     
  17. Jerseyhammer May 7, 2018

    Posts
    1,617
    Likes
    8,636
    100% agree re OM database . As for the dial it’s the south crosshair that would concern me & the thickness but for the price wear and enjoy it in good health IMO
     
    ivisga likes this.
  18. ivisga May 7, 2018

    Posts
    9
    Likes
    3
    Thank you very much guys really, this is my first time on this forum and all I can say about the community is "God damn amazing!". Thank you again for all your contributions on this thread and good health to all :)