What a great idea!

Case Reference: 165.014
Case Maker: HF
Year: 1966-7
Movement Caliber: 552
Serial Range: 23,7#####
Bezel Type: thin with original bakelite insert, numbers worn off
Hand Type: Baton, green tritium, original white painted second hand with green tritium
Dial Type: Small triangle, non-date, green tritium, no pin-holes
Bracelet Type: NATO
Crown Type: Naiad, small & close feet omega
Crystal: Original acrylic close feet Omega







Case Reference: 165.024
Case Maker: HF
Year: 1964
Movement Caliber: 552
Serial Range: 22,8#####
Bezel Type: acrylic bold condensed font - flat top '3' - rounded top '4' - serif on '1' , biege tritium
Hand Type: Baton type biege tritium, original white painted second hand with green/biege tritium
Dial Type: Small triangle, T SWISS T, non-date, green tritium, pin-holes @ 12 and 6
Bracelet: Type: NATO
Crown Type: Naiad, larger & wider feet omega
Crystal: Original acrylic close feet Omega







Case ref: 165.024
Case Maker: HF
Year: 1967
Movement Caliber: 552
Serial Range: 24,2#####
Bezel Type: Acrylic bold condensed font - rounded top '3' - flat top '4' - horizontal serif on '1')
Hand Type: Sword type, green tritium, original white painted second hand with green tritium
Dial Type: Large triangle, T SWISS T, non-date, green tritium, pin holes @12 and 6
Bracelet: Type: As bought, 1506 with 16 end pieces
Crown Type: Naiad, small & close feet omega
Crystal: Original acrylic close feet Omega

 

Case Reference: 165.024

Case Maker: HF- unpolished

Year: 1966

Movement Caliber: 552

Serial Range: 241*****

Bezel Type: original Bakelite

Hand Type: tritium sword hands

Dial Type: Big triangle, non-date, pin hole at 6 & 12 o'clock markers

Crown Type: Naiad, small & close feet omega

Crystal: Original acrylic close feet Omega- crazily crazed

Bracelet Type: elastic parachute material

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Any thoughts on a value perspective for the varies different 300's as there seems to be a spectrum?

 

I HATE/LOVE this thread!

 

Here are the results of my search about bezels (already posted on OF, but I think it might be usefull here)
(I'll post pictures of mine when I have time)

 

This thread deserves a 'Sticky'.
What a treasure trove of information.

 

So, here's an interesting 165.014 with confirmed production date of 1967 and matching 24 million serial number vs. supposed 1964 production cutoff - can others please confirm that typically 1964 is when most people believe that 165.014 production ceased? (thanks). Based on its 1967 production date, the broad sword hands may be original. Matdaytona (OF) also sent me a pic of an Extract from a 1966 165.014 (not his watch I understand), so it would appear that there other post-64 165.014's out there. Does anyone else have one?

Case Reference: 165.014
Case Maker: HF
Year: 1967
Movement Caliber: 552
Serial Range: 24,226,XXX
Bezel Type: original bakelite insert
Hand Type: Broad sword
Dial Type: 165.024 style
Bracelet Type: 1035 (2/67), #6
Crown Type: ?
Crystal: ?










and the 1966 165.014 extract:

 

Hi Quentin

I'd suggest the Hands are original....and both were watches supplied to South America....so perhaps Omega found a box of them at the back of the cupboard ?

Best - Neil

 

Neil - thanks.
Yes, I was wondering if in the 1960's Omega was prone to shipping obsolete products to what might have been viewed as secondary markets such as Mexico and Columbia (where both of the post-64 165.014's were sold).

 

This is a poor point of view IMO, and should not be speculated on this forum especially without any creditable evidence.
The Omega extract evidence clearly shows Seamaster 300's (165.014) 1966-77 production. Everyday is a school day when vintage watches are concerned this is one of the reasons it is such an interesting hobby. Do we start to question all Omega extract information now or believe everyone's personal "Expert" opinions?

 

Not exactly sure what point you are trying to make?

 

"Both watches supplied to South America?"

"1960's Omega was prone to shipping obsolete products to........?"

Not sure!

 

It is just an observation and I agree that based on only two examples, it is pure speculation. But if production did end in 1964, it is interesting that Omega was still shipping what would have been an old product as late as 1967. If you are Mexican or Colombian, then I apologize if you are offended by the implication that these two countries may have been secondary markets. Who knows, maybe they were shipping them to all markets.

 

Why do you (and others?) think that production of the 165.014 stopped in 1964?? Where did you get that idea?
Actually both 1965 and 1966 were quite large production years of the 165.014. Some facts from my research and year-long archives:
The 165.014 reference was produced from summer 1963 and to very early 1967.
Came in sub-references '62, '63, '64 and the last ones with no sub-reference (like yours).
Some people confuses sub-reference year with production year. They are NOT the same. The sub-reference year was the year of introduction of the sub-reference, but not equal to production start or end! Furthermore you can't use Omega's serial chart to anything regarding precise production dates/years (only their extracts) and last, the serial ranges for production of the single sub-references were in batches, but not necessarily in chronological order. At all! That is also why for instance US productions (cal. 550 and not cal. 552) sometimes fall a bit out of range regarding serial and production time! Anyway, 65 and especially 66 were big production years...and delivery to the whole World! And your gladiator hour hand is ok on the very late 165.014 (no sub-reference) productions. Have seen a few and have one also. Quite normal in the transition phases towards new parts (the 165.024 also got these around that time).

My own rule of thumb
165.014-62 was produced from around late summer 1963 - most with serial 193x or 203x
165.014-63 was produced from around spring 1964 - most with serial 203x, 206x, 209x
165.014-64 was produced from around early 1965 og well through 1966 (the most common subreference spottet) - most with serial 224x, 225x, 229x, 230x, 237x
165.014 straight was produced from around mid 1966 and to very early 67 - most with serial 237x and some 241 or 2x

 

errrr..........
http://chronomaddox.com/seamaster_3oo_a_history.html

 

I rest my case.
Omega must have got it wrong and Bill ("from my own personal observations") must be correct.

 

Gemini, also apparently thought the same as me.

Damn........money wasted on an Extract of the Archives!

https://omegaforums.net/threads/seamaster-165014-on-1035-bracelet.44379/#post-524596

 

Am I being dense..............don't understand what you are saying?

 

Thanks.............immensely useful information...............have you thought about writing a Seamaster 300 only book?

 

No, I think Bill Sohne got it wrong http://chronomaddox.com/seamaster_3oo_a_history.html. Would put my money on KOX and Omega