Seamaster 300 165.024 -63 arrived

Pahawi · Dec 20, 2019

Hi all,

Thought I'd share my latest buy with you 😀

SM 300’s is new territory for me, so I’ve researched a lot before purchase, plus I’ve had great help from the our own SM 300 expert Kox (thanks again, Kox👍). To me the watch looks great for its age. First gen. bezel in ok condition. Under the old crystal the dial looks to be perfect. Small pieces of the missing lume on the second and minute hand seems to be floating around on the dial. To me the case seems polished very little?, but there’s of course signs of use (and lots of lovely grime). Crystal have the old style logo as far as I can see. Bracelet is a 1506 marked 1/64 and endlinks marked #16. The 9 stretch links are as tight as on a nos 1039 I have. Extract says production April 14, 1964, with delivery to US Army Foreign Exchanges.

Pics (sorry for the lousy dial pics, but with that old scratched up crystal. I can’t do it better):

I’ll probably have the lume on the hands stabilized / relumed.

As said, I'm a newbie in SM 300 land, so let me know if I've missed something 😀

VetPsychWars · Dec 20, 2019

"Lovely grime"? Why in heaven would you say that? All that dirt does is act as an abrasive below your bezel and in your bracelet.

Tom

Spruce · Dec 20, 2019

VetPsychWars
"Lovely grime"? Why in heaven would you say that? All that dirt does is act as an abrasive below your bezel and in your bracelet.

Tom

Possibly because it suggests that the watch is in an original condition and hasn’t been polished up etc?

jaguar11 · Dec 20, 2019

Looks to be in nice unmolested condition to me evidenced in part by the lovely grime. Should look great with a clean and service with the work as you suggest on the hands.

VetPsychWars · Dec 20, 2019

Spruce
Possibly because it suggests that the watch is in an original condition and hasn’t been polished up etc?

Dirt does a watch no good. You don't know what's in it and there might be corrosive agents in addition to the abrasives.

I get your position but have some caution as well.

Tom

EdtheAussie · Dec 20, 2019

That's an awesome watch! Love the gilty dial and thin font bezel.

JwRosenthal · Dec 20, 2019

Lovely watch- but I agree with @VetPsychWars - clean that thing ASAP- don’t grind that dirt into the bezel/bracelet anymore! Also, a wet sand will bring that crystal back to new- some of those scratches are too deep for Polywatch but not so deep that a light wet sand wouldn’t bring it back.

I know many here rant about reluming- but I personally think the minute hand should be stabilized and the spot that’s missing filled to match (I had this done on a Seawolf and you can’t see the repair and I rest easy that it won’t fall apart now) and I would have the second hand filled to match the rest. I don’t think stabilizing and filling a hand that is already missing the lume would affect the value in any way and in fact would bring peace of mind that lume won’t disintegrate anymore on the minute hand. The second hand is already gone so why not.

Just to show a stabilization and fill:

Before

After

VetPsychWars · Dec 20, 2019

I personally prefer the crystal on the Seamaster 300 be replaced, because it's identical and a service part. A 200 meter dive watch deserves to be recertified.

Tom

ndgal · Dec 20, 2019

Pahawi
To me the case seems polished very little?

It wasn't.
This looks like a pure untouched virgin piece. Exactly how you want to find them.
Even down to what look like the original spring bars! Congrats!

watchyouwant · Dec 20, 2019

Which Year? 1963?

jeppehh · Dec 21, 2019

Congrats @Pahawi. It’s a beauty!

Kargol · Dec 21, 2019

Love this 300's.. Enjoy in pleasure

mac_omega · Dec 21, 2019

Well done! 👍 🥰

JanV · Dec 21, 2019

Looking all good and correct, congratulations. These gen1’s are some rare pieces. Beautiful!

simonsays · Dec 21, 2019

I like! The gilt dial and thin font bezel give quite a distinctive and unusual look.

There have been some disagreement about these dials, some saying that the white writing has aged. I have looked carefully at one and it is clear to me that they are originally printed with gold paint, and they are few and far between.

Very nice ‘barn find’ condition!

simonsays · Dec 21, 2019

As a side note, it would be interesting to see the back of this dial. It appears not to have pin holes, although the lume maybe covering them. I wonder if it is not a Stern dial?

Pahawi · Dec 21, 2019

Spruce
Possibly because it suggests that the watch is in an original condition and hasn’t been polished up etc?

Exactly

Pahawi · Dec 21, 2019

watchyouwant
Which Year? 1963?

-63 in the caseback. Produktion date April 14 - 1964. Odd, or....?

gemini4 · Dec 21, 2019

My 165.024-63 says welcome.

Pinoysurf · Dec 28, 2019

gemini4
My 165.024-63 says welcome.

Is it just me or does the OPs 6 and 9s not look as open as gemini4's ? Maybe just the angle.

Seamaster 300 165.024 -63 arrived

Pahawi

VetPsychWars

Spruce

jaguar11

VetPsychWars

EdtheAussie

JwRosenthal

VetPsychWars

ndgal

watchyouwant

jeppehh

Kargol

mac_omega

JanV

simonsays

simonsays

Pahawi

Pahawi

gemini4

Pinoysurf

Similar threads

Omega Seamaster 300 165.024 Authenticity Check

Seamaster 300 165.024 Advertised by Dealers in Dec 1972

Omega Seamaster 300 165.024 (1969) Cal. 550 Pickup

Omega Seamaster 300 165.024 (1968) Authenticity Check

Omega Seamaster 300 Ref 165.024 Authenticity Check

Omega Seamaster 300 165.024 Big Triangle: Fake Check