Seamaster 1948: deal or no deal

[Farrowla]

Evening all,

I’m fighting an urge to buy a Seamaster 1948 (without the small seconds hand) and am seeking some OF wisdom.

I can pick one up new from an AD for $6,800 (including two OEM leather straps and a NATO). Maybe as low as $6,100 if they are willing to negotiate.

Not sure how available these still are, or whether it’s considered a desirable limited edition. I just love the simplicity of the classic design.

The alternative is to pick up a vintage Omega of a similar classic style. I’m new to this game And would appreciate any thoughts or opinions.

 

[flw]

I have the small seconds version, and it's one of the gems of my collection. This is a model that will hold its value better than many other Omega models, and its versatility should make it a distinctive addition to your watch box (that's certainly true of mine). As far as availability is concerned, these are becoming harder to find, especially at the kind of price you mentioned. If you can negotiate the deal you're talking about, you shouldn't leave it on the shelf.

 

[Farrowla]

flw

I have the small seconds version, and it's one of the gems of my collection. This is a model that will hold its value better than many other Omega models, and its versatility should make it a distinctive addition to your watch box (that's certainly true of mine). As far as availability is concerned, these are becoming harder to find, especially at the kind of price you mentioned. If you can negotiate the deal you're talking about, you shouldn't leave it on the shelf.

Thank you for the insight. I love the small seconds version as well - and if given the choice I would find it difficult to pick. The AD only has one left (without the small seconds) so at least I don’t have that headache!

 

[140dave]

If I walked into an AD and they still had a new one it would leave on my wrist. Its one of the few modern pieces on my current want-list.

 

[Farrowla]

140dave

If I walked into an AD and they still had a new one it would leave on my wrist. It’s one of the few modern pieces on my current want-list.

I’m happy to know I’m not the only one! Thank you for your comment. At least I know I’m not being totally irrational.

 

[apsm100]

Small seconds for sure.
They really messed up the handset proportions on the center seconds one.

 

[Alfista88]

What do you like most about the model? Perhaps forum members can recommend alternatives.

That 3-hander also turned my head when it came out. But my interest waned very quickly, due to:
1) Egregiously short hour and minute hands. They are totally out of proportion with the size of the seconds hand, and the dial diameter.

2) Graffiti on sapphire caseback. I'd have preferred an all steel caseback in combination with the graphics. And for the weight savings

3) Out of place "CO-AXIAL MASTER CHRONOMETER" printing. Doesn't fit at all, with the retro font of the Omega and Seamaster.

 

[Annapolis]

I love the overall look of this watch and the modern proportions blended with vintage styling. That said, I for one am skeptical of the idea of such a watch “holding its value.” Omega does so many LEs, and vintage reissues can be seen as gimmicky. Buy it if you like it—but I’d err on the side of assuming you will lose a few grand if you decide to sell it eventually.

If it were me, and if I were in the position of saving up a bit more money, I’d pass on this for the reasons already mentioned (especially the ugly caseback), and instead go for a JLC Master Control (perhaps preowned). It’s a similar vibe but less gimmicky, and a higher level of watchmaking than Omega. Just my 2 cents.

 

[kkt]

My take: this is a long-term purchase. Don't let what happens to be on the dealer's shelf this week play a major role in your decision.

 

[Donn Chambers]

Annapolis

I love the overall look of this watch and the modern proportions blended with vintage styling. That said, I for one am skeptical of the idea of such a watch “holding its value.” Omega does so many LEs, and vintage reissues can be seen as gimmicky. Buy it if you like it—but I’d err on the side of assuming you will lose a few grand if you decide to sell it eventually.

If it were me, and if I were in the position of saving up a bit more money, I’d pass on this for the reasons already mentioned (especially the ugly caseback), and instead go for a JLC Master Control (perhaps preowned). It’s a similar vibe but less gimmicky, and a higher level of watchmaking than Omega. Just my 2 cents.

+1 on this. A much nicer watch on multiple levels.

 

[Farrowla]

Alfista88

What do you like most about the model? Perhaps forum members can recommend alternatives.

That 3-hander also turned my head when it came out. But my interest waned very quickly, due to:
1) Egregiously short hour and minute hands. They are totally out of proportion with the size of the seconds hand, and the dial diameter.

2) Graffiti on sapphire caseback. I'd have preferred an all steel caseback in combination with the graphics. And for the weight savings

3) Out of place "CO-AXIAL MASTER CHRONOMETER" printing. Doesn't fit at all, with the retro font of the Omega and Seamaster.

Thanks for this - super helpful to get your perspective. I was drawn to it by the styling: simple, classic and I love the color/design. And the fact that it has a vintage look but in a modern (master chrono) package. I do see what you mean about the hour and minute hands. Hadn’t really noticed that before, and may have a closer look in person - although not sure that’s a deal breaker for me personally. Really appreciate your thoughts.

 

[Farrowla]

Annapolis

I love the overall look of this watch and the modern proportions blended with vintage styling. That said, I for one am skeptical of the idea of such a watch “holding its value.” Omega does so many LEs, and vintage reissues can be seen as gimmicky. Buy it if you like it—but I’d err on the side of assuming you will lose a few grand if you decide to sell it eventually.

If it were me, and if I were in the position of saving up a bit more money, I’d pass on this for the reasons already mentioned (especially the ugly caseback), and instead go for a JLC Master Control (perhaps preowned). It’s a similar vibe but less gimmicky, and a higher level of watchmaking than Omega. Just my 2 cents.

Thanks - love the JLC and a great alternative suggestion. Not sure I can justify the cost of a new one, but will see what options are available in the preowned route to get an idea of prices.

 

[Farrowla]

kkt

My take: this is a long-term purchase. Don't let what happens to be on the dealer's shelf this week play a major role in your decision.

Very good advice. Appreciate it.

 

[Alfista88]

Adding a couple options, that also meet the criteria of classic looks combined with modern tech! Both can be had for a lower price than the LE Seamaster 1948.

1) Glashutte Original 60s.
2) Grand Seiko SBGW231 elegance

Both come in standard dial colors, and limited edition dials. Between the 2, I think the GS has better proportions between the case and the movement, and has dauphine handset matching the Omega 1948 LE.

I don't have ownership experience with Grand Seiko, but I've owned a Glashutte SeaQ for 2 years and have found that to be very accurate, reliable. Compared to Omega's modern dive watches, the SeaQ wears much lighter, and slimmer. I expect you'll find that comparison holds true if you compare a 1948 Seamaster with a GO 60s side by side. This classified ad has a great photo of the 60's side view, where you can see its slender streamlined lugs and curved sapphire crystal. https://www.watchclub.com/glashutte...utomaticcompleteset-ref-13952060204-year-2017

 

[ErichPryde]

I've got to agree with @Annapolis and @Donn Chambers on this, for this style of watch I think jlc is absolutely top pick.

 

[Evitzee]

Blancpain also made some nice looking time only watches, too. There are lots of options in this space.

 

[Spqr]

First, this is a reissue of the Seamaster from 1948, so the hand set is exactly correct vis a vis the original watch. Criticism of the hand set is completely nonsensical in that context. Second, it is not a so-called “dress” watch like the JLC or the other alternative watches being suggested. In 1948 it was a sporty watch designed to be worn in the city during the week then at home at the weekend without having to worry about activities like sailing or tennis etc. once you wear one you will realise the watch has quite a presence on the wrist and is most definitely not simply a dressy trinket. Third, the 1948 Seamaster is one of Omega’s more limited Limited Editions with 1948 of the centre seconds version in steel plus 70 in platinum and the same number for the small seconds version. Compare that to the 7007 Seamaster Professional James Bond “limited edition” from a few years ago or the thousands of Speedmaster limited editions and there are not many of these about. While it may not go up too much in value yet it will not lose too much either. As for the case back it is a non-issue, you do not see once you are wearing it and it is fare less fussy than non-owners make out. I have the 1948 Centre Seconds, the 1948 Small Seconds and the much earlier 1948 London 2012 Olympic as well. I like the design and so can say that they all wear well but the Centre a seconds is my favourite as it is actually fairly unique looking watch given that Omega do lots of small seconds watches. It also has SLN on the hands and markers making it useful at night.

 

[Annapolis]

For what it’s worth, I personally wouldn’t call that JLC a straightforward dress watch either—it’s pretty sporty on that flat stitched strap, it’s stainless, has a date, and is fairly robust.

But that’s not to take anything away from your assessment of the Omega.

But again, I’d be cautious about the ‘not going down’/retaining value argument regarding any modern Omega that’s not one of the hyped Speedmasters (and even those might be a gamble long term). I know (and have owned or currently own) limited edition Omegas with way lower production runs that this, and some have lost 50% in value. Just because something is rare doesn’t mean it’s valuable or desirable. And especially with a reissue like this, I wouldn’t expect it to fare well long term. Vintage buyers will almost always seek out the real thing, not the modern homage. And modern buyers weren’t nuts about these, as cool as they are. There’s a reason one is still sitting in a dealer’s case (per the OP).

 

[Adam2941]

I saw one of these in an airport recently and fell in love, especially since I have a fine date @6 vintage example of this model...until I turned it over. Beware, the display back has a ridiculous (in my opinion) laser-etched drawing of a WWII bomber, which has nothing to do with the Seamaster story and obscures the beautiful movement. Sorry, I did not photograph the back. (Why, Omega!?)

 

[Farrowla]

Alfista88

Adding a couple options, that also meet the criteria of classic looks combined with modern tech! Both can be had for a lower price than the LE Seamaster 1948.

1) Glashutte Original 60s.
2) Grand Seiko SBGW231 elegance

Both come in standard dial colors, and limited edition dials. Between the 2, I think the GS has better proportions between the case and the movement, and has dauphine handset matching the Omega 1948 LE.

I don't have ownership experience with Grand Seiko, but I've owned a Glashutte SeaQ for 2 years and have found that to be very accurate, reliable. Compared to Omega's modern dive watches, the SeaQ wears much lighter, and slimmer. I expect you'll find that comparison holds true if you compare a 1948 Seamaster with a GO 60s side by side. This classified ad has a great photo of the 60's side view, where you can see its slender streamlined lugs and curved sapphire crystal. https://www.watchclub.com/glashutte...utomaticcompleteset-ref-13952060204-year-2017

Thank you. The GS you referenced is very nice. Probably speaks to me more than the Glashutte, due to its simplicity and overall looks. Will definitely try this one on the wrist before I pull the trigger on any purchase. Thanks again for your suggestions!