I have owned this SM 300 for over 10 Years, purchased via a forum from a UK member, I remember carrying out due diligence as is necessary on any SM 300 purchase as there are so many fake and put together examples out there. When I received the watch back then, I remember being especially chuffed and confident of it's originality. and correctness. Over the years I have worn it on and off in rotation, and recall showing it to my watchmaker, whose I trust implicitly and respect highly for his work ,opinion, and advice. And who over the years has saved me money, and who now I also call a friend. He did however have doubts over this SM 300, he didn't go as far as to say it was wrong, but declined to comment, which given he handles these models all the time (real and fake), and is a avid watch collector himself sowed a shadow of doubt in my mind, and I started to question the watch. I suspected that the case may have been too 'good', and was fake and married with correct 552 movement and dial. I then lost some love for it, and it stayed at the bottom of the safe slightly neglected, until finally a month ago I applied for the Extract of Archives, this was the first time I have ever done this for a watch. As when I first started collecting watches, this service was not available and you relied on self taught knowledge and a calculated risk. Well, the day came when the Extract arrived in the post, and the letter sat there waiting. I took a deep breath, tore the heavy grade envelope open, and the first words I read were 'Divers watch, then Seamaster 300, the correct cal 552, in Steel, no bracelet, the movement no. I submitted and most importantly ST 165.024 corresponding to the watch model number. Wow, relief and satisfaction that it was a goodun. It just goes to show how useful the service can be. I won't be applying for my other Omegas, but recommend it for relative high value watches, and if you have any doubts over originality of model and movement construct. It also shows that even the best experienced experts can get it wrong and it's OK to go with one's instinct. The fact that the watch was made in 1968, also confirms it as a birth year watch. Anyway, enough said, thanks for reading, and here are some images for your troubles, as a post with no images is only half a post to me!
Haha, yeah, you could say that! At the time I thought I had over paid for a SM300, but actually as with most vintage watches, 'you don't overpay, you just paid too much too soon'.