I fell off the wagon a couple of months ago and bought this 50s-era Seamaster with a very spotted dial. I've only now been able to take a good look at and get some photos. It was hard to get the back off, but that was a picnic, stress-wise, compared to getting the thing back on afterward.

I very much like the way the dial has aged. It looks good to my soft-focus eyes, especially on a rough alligator strap against my tropicalized arm in the summertime. I'm curious about the following:

1. The Omega and Türler logos seem distinctly off-center—I didn't notice this until I took photos.
2. The crown doesn't look right to me. Should it be one of the earlier, less toothy ones?
3. The crystal doesn't have an Omega logo, which should be there in this era, I think.
4. No "SWISS MADE" visible on the dial.

I need to get it serviced. It's very hard to photograph the numbers etched to the right of the FAB SUISSE/SWISS MADE lines, but they seem to say "35 608," which in Japanese would indicate a service date in 1960. There's another set of scratches above that, near the ACIER INOXYDABLE line, but I can't make it out.

I forgot to get a picture of the back, but it's a plain snap-on type with a very faint SEAMASTER and WATERPROOF in boxes on the top and the bottom bouts.

I would be grateful for your insights.

 

Crown is not correct, and a correct one will not be easy to find. Unfortunately they didn’t use the more typical Seamaster clover crown on this reference but rather a similar variation - see mine below. I don’t know the specifications but if they’re the same then a clover crown would be an okay replacement.

Regarding the dial, the fonts look okay. Aging and two-tone coloration seem okay. Swiss Made may be hidden by the crystal retention ring. Text is definitely off center.. not sure what to think of that given everything else seems fine. I say original.

Hands may actually be replacements, but I wouldn’t mind because it’s the originals that were a bit out of place. Typically on Seamasters the minute hand ends at the tick marks but on this reference they actually extend beyond the tick marks.