Original or redial? OMEGA Automatic Seamaster

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.

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.

So except the redial it's a very nice watch..now depend how much did you pay for it..😀

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.

Well my cellphone won't focus sorry for the quality of those pictures.

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?

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.

I don't like the spacing and relatively high location of the SWISS MADE.

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.

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

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 😀