Hi all , I am a longtime lurker here on OF and finally decided to register here and dip my toes. I am a small time watch enthusiast with a small collection of vintage and modern pieces. I have been passively looking to expand my collection with a vintage Seamaster preferably pre 165.024. This beauty popped up for sale from a reputable dealer: The bezel insert might be a repro or genuine bakelite(though in a exceptionally (too?) good condition). The price is reasonable imho either way. My question is about the movement: Seller states that it is 1965 but as far as I can discern the serial is 25mil putting it well into 67 region. It might be the light but the movement seems to have a different level of patina on few of those parts(bridges?). I have seen an extract for 24.2mil serial 165014 with production 1/67. I would kindly ask your opinions on this if you have any. I am ready , willing and able to pull the trigger on this but this serial/date mismatch has me second guessing on this. I thank you in advance for any insight
I would only buy this after getting confirmation of an Extract of the Archives that this movement truly is legit and home in a 165014. To me this looks like the movement is definitely from a later production than the watch. Even though the 165024’s and 165014’s overlapped each other for a while. Question, what does the caseback on this watch state, any additional pictures available?
Thanks for the input. For some reason they blurred it. I sent a query to see an unblurred caseback. Hopefully I'll get a response.
Now why would anyone do this?? These are the things making me even more anxious and wanting an EoA confirmation even more. Hopefully they provide you with more pictures.
Odd that they blurred the caseback number and movement caliber. It may be the lighting, but the plate with the serial looks a lot newer than the bridge and other components...
It is odd that they chose to blur those, and agree that photo/lighting does make them look different age. I am not insinuating anything but I have asked for additional photos and clarification on the date/serial mismatch. With the knowledge that I have currently, I feel that the 25 mil serial is a tad late imho to be in this otherwise very nice looking watch. Hopefully I'll get additional info and pics from the seller. I am really kinda hoping that this is legit, or else the wait continues.
Only my thoughts but.. Dial, hands and bezel look more like ref 147055 from early 1960s but movement later 1967? Bezel probably re worked maybe by Aldo in Italy?
Oohh just like mine, which has an original bezel . Just checked the archive i have. 22503 serial tells me it is Nov 1965. Be interested in the advertised price also.
Is there a 100% giveaway thing you see? Or is it the overall vibe and a gut feeling? Honestly, I cant see a specific thing that screams "REPRO" but the discrepancy in flawless mint bezel insert and a worn case + a heavily patinated tritium gives it a repro-vibe.
Will try to do tonight if I can find some . Watch is currently in a safe deposit box where I used to live. Put them there when I moved and never been bothered to collect . I could not see myself wearing it with the original bezel since prices have gone up on these, which is a bit sad..
I found this pic of mine. Bit poor sorry. Bezel has a crazing all over it , which i am not sure the picture shows.
bezel is repro and the movement serial is too late for a 165.014 and looks like a later assembly of parts. Let @kox or any of the other sm300 guys confirm before making any moves on this one.
Thanks for the advice to you and everyone else. I haven't heard from the seller regarding my additional inquiries so I am backpedaling at an steadily increasing rate out of this. Thanks to all for the advice and input. P.s. Absolutely gorgeous piece Jerry , well done
Based on various extract from archive I have I can confirm this is 10/1965 movement and probably the ref is okay if 165.014. Earliest 166.024 I have in my database is 1 year younger.