With no MWO for Seamasters, it is definitely harder to assess these but I'm hoping I did ok with this one. I believe (hope) that it is all original except for the crown. Movement number 19364xxx. I presume this is an early 165.014 as it appears identical to the earlier Seamaster 14755-61. Hands, dial and bezel are all original and radium lumed. These bezels are hard to find in their original state as they are very fragile and flake away. This one unfortunately was painted in a couple of areas. Case appears to be not polished. All and all, I'm pleased. Still learning about early diver Seamasters so opinions are very appreciated. Dial should indicate SWISS MADE under the 6. I believe it is hidden by the rehaut ring. Original Bakelite bezel with radium lume. Makes a gieger counter go nuts. Original hands with lume matching the dial. Crown is a replacement. Crystal has the omega emblem and may be original. I presume this watch saw little wrist time. Movement 19364xxx is correct for 1962. Caseback 165.014-62
It's very hard to tell from photos, but the hour marker lume looks to be flush with the dial surface. The original lume should be recessed and sits below the dial surface in the triangular lume wells. These straight lugged 300's are great though and still maybe undervalued. Nice find!
I agree, something doesn't look right with the dial, but Its very hard to tell from the images, can you post some macros of the hour lume? Also why is the pointer green? It looks like the bezel is a redo, but again very hard to tell from photos. Either that or this was simply never worn and stored away in a safe environment for 50+ years as it looks brand new. A macro shot of the numbers on bezel would help identify if its original. It could very well be that you have a mint untouched example, which would be pretty sweet. The green pointer though is odd.
here is a good way to tell an original bezel from a non-original (enlarge this image) three things to note: 1- the original bezel has a clean lines on top and bottom edge and does not bleed into the outer edges 2- numbers don't have ragged edges and look more organic in the application. 3- generally speaking after 50+ years the font will not still be pure white. You typically see these aged to a off white or more yellow. Same with the numbers on the dial.
Thanks Cajun for your comments. One additional reason I believe that the bezel is original is regarding the gieger counter readings from the radium lume bezel. Over 2000 cpm which is much higher than similar readings from a early radium dial speedmaster or 321 Seamaster. I will take and post the pics you suggest.
can't tell from the images...do you have a loupe? Look at the font, if the edges are jagged (like attached), its not original. also look at the lume in the hour plots...it should be recessed. If the lume is on top of the dial, its not good.
Will try and examine it more in the coming days and take better macro photos. The bezel numbers do not look as crisp as they should. Perhaps the numbers are redone on an original bezel. I really appreciate your comments.
this is a legit bezel...do you see how the top edge of the black bakelite is crisp and not infringing into the outer edge. The numbers look like they were made in 1950...they are not crisp, but look very different from the modern reproduction.
I'm not seeing the dial lume recessed. It appears to be applied. Looks like this watch is becoming less original by the minute. As with all vintage watches, it's a learning experience and this is a lesson. i still like the watch although it is not original as I had hoped. Wasn't overly expensive and sold (at auction) without any promises of originality.
here are a couple better examples of the original lume...if you look from an angle the lume fills a cut out on the dial, so its flush with the dial and not painted on the top surface.
I still have my first "lesson watch"...I keep it to remind me that you are never to old to learn. I learn something new every single day...it keeps me young.
I read a few articles regarding vintage sm 300 dials. Most information seems to be aimed at 165.024 dial redos. Now I'm learning about 2913/14755/165.012-62 dial issues. Interested in writing Seamaster Only??? It's needed. Thanks Cajun. I presume you are an LSU fan. My younger son is a Tulane grad and visit to NOLA is always a good time.
I wish I had time Yes, LSU fan...my son is looking at schools now...may end up in New Orleans, we will see.
Did some more analysis on this Seamaster 165.014-62, and other vintage sm i own and came to a few tentative conclusions. 1) I opened the case a bit and was able to see the correct SWISS MADE inscription at 6 o'clock. Dial matches that of my 2913-3. Conclusion: Dial is original. 2) compared the lume plots to my 2913-3 and pic provided by @CajunTiger and plots on this 165.012-62 are raised, not indented. Conclusion: dial was relumed probably many years ago. I believe this to be true because the dial lume barely holds a charge of light. 3) tested 2913-3 with Geiger Counter. This sm has original dial and hands BUT the dial was redone by Aldo and has no radium. Observed readings of 400 - 500 CPM (see below) as compared with 2000+ CPM with the 165.012-62. Tested 165.012-64 (TT dial and bezel) and CPM reading was barely above background ambient level. This is where the reading is expected as 50 year old Tritium is barely radioactive. Conclusion: the 165.012-62 bezel is original with radium lume. Possible bezel lume plots were touched up in the past. I believe that the major components of the watch, Case, dial, movement, hands and bezels are original. Dial and perhaps bezel touched up. Since the hands match the dial lume, hands were probably redone as well. Question is what to do next. Answer: Except for perhaps brushing off the dial lume......nothing. To me, everything looks nice and I like the watch.