Seamaster 300 165024-63 unreferenced second hand

[jaegodylan]

Concer

Maybe your father in law bought the watch at the ad already in used condition and he just thought it was new….

But whatsoever, the watch looks awesome. To find a matching second hand won’t be that great problem. You can already wear and enjoy it 👍

Interestingly I just got an extract for a watch with a similar setup.. though the correct second hand.. that dated to January 1968 delivery to the NAAFI in the UK.

 

[obstando]

Passover

Humidity or relume? 😕 Anyone? 😀

The lume looks perfectly correct to me

 

[Passover]

obstando

The lume looks perfectly correct to me

Its not the lume itself but the surrounding areas:

 

[obstando]

jaegodylan

Interestingly I just got an extract for a watch with a similar setup.. though the correct second hand.. that dated to January 1968 delivery to the NAAFI in the UK.

I can understand examples of 165024's with baton hands being sold in the late 60's (I had a 165014 dating to 1967) but this is a 165024-63 with the correct bezel which was produced for a very short period of time and I cannot believe that it would have been sold after 1964

 

[obstando]

Passover

Its not the lume itself but the surrounding areas:

The dial looks completely correct - I assume the area you refer to as surrounding area is the area that shows the lume plot where the lume has shrunk. Perfectly normal

 

[Donn Chambers]

Passover

Humidity or relume? 😕 Anyone? 😀

I vote humidity damage. I had a 1966 Seamaster 300 where the lume on half the dial looked like that, but the other half was a moldy, black mess. I only bought it because it was so cheap (got it for less than a $1k from an antique shop in New Orleans). Would have been happy to keep the dial if it looked like this, but because half of it was a mess, I decided to (gasp) do a full restore with a service dial, hands, and bezel.

crazy thing was, I sold the messed up dial, bezel, and hands on EBay and got back more than it cost for the restoration.

 

[ConElPueblo]

obstando

The dial looks completely correct - I assume the area you refer to as surrounding area is the area that shows the lume plot where the lume has shrunk. Perfectly normal

I am pretty sure that he is refering to the grey areas around the plots, not the white showing. I agree that it could well be moisture damage, in which case a relume - old or not - is plausible. The lume would have been damaged before the dial finish, IMO.

 

[Passover]

ConElPueblo

I am pretty sure that he is refering to the grey areas around the plots

I'm indeed!

 

[FabulousFab]

Passover

Humidity or relume? 😕 Anyone? 😀

You are right! Probably are the effect of humidity, the watch need to be serviced because I spotted it on the glass some day ago

Edited: Oct 14, 2021

 

[FabulousFab]

Other movement’s picture for your evaluation 😀

 

[Seaborg]

Passover

I'm indeed!

Moisture damage for me. Does not look like a relume.

 

[FabulousFab]

Seaborg

Moisture damage for me. Does not look like a relume.

are these kind of damages reversible?

 

[Scarecrow Boat]

F FabulousFab

are these kind of damages reversible?

I would leave it as is. Trying to reverse this damage will only create more irreversible damage.

 

[gemini4]

obstando

I can understand examples of 165024's with baton hands being sold in the late 60's (I had a 165014 dating to 1967) but this is a 165024-63 with the correct bezel which was produced for a very short period of time and I cannot believe that it would have been sold after 1964

I can believe it. My 165024-63 was produced in the summer of 1964.