Seamaster 300m midsize thought

Gui13250

Hi all,
I’ve been in love with the blue seamaster 300m at first sight, one day or another I’ll get one.
As 41mm may be too big to me (I’ve got a Blackbay ETA which a love, but it is big!), I’m also looking for midsize version.

here is the point:
Most of us seems to love « small » diameter, but the midsize Seamaster 300 seems to be less appreciated than the 41mm.

is there a main reason? Is the movement from the midsize less interesting than the 41mm version?
Anyone who has feedbacks about owning the midsize?

maybe I’m just missing something, let share it 😀

T Tony

I have the model in the pic you posted (2551.80) and love it. Wrist size is 6.5 in. Here's a wrist shot:

Gui13250

It works really well on your wrist!

T Tony

Thank you! I'm just not into the "big watch" thing that's been going on the last decade or so...

Gui13250

It would be great if someone has the opportunity to take 2 wrist shots, one with the midsize and another one with the full size.
It would be interesting in order to compare...

by the way, my wrist measure 18cm, but I guess it is also about the shape, flat or rounded etc.. (just talking about wrist uh )

robinhook

A bit late to the party. I’ve got both, wrist size 6’3. I prefer the midsize. First pic is the comparison of the 2, the other pics are the midsize.

B Bertoldo

Hi,
I am interested in buying a pre owned mid size version. Most of them are advertised as 36mm. Others as 36.25mm. Are there 36mm versions out here? Perhaps older models? I know it is only 0.25 difference, but since they are already pretty small, I would like to know for sure. I have a black bezel version of the year 2000 in mind..
Anyone knows? Thanks

Crunchie

I think the mid-size ones were all officially 36.25mm

To be honest, I don’t think .25mm would make a big difference.

padders

You can tell from looking at them, the earlier tritium models have lume that is much more beige in colour and usually the hands and dial have faded to where would you look for a intere


different colours. Omega switched from tritium to SL at the end of 1997 so if the watch is truly from 2000 (and didn’t sit on the shelf for 3 years before selling) it will be using SL.

it sounds pretty expensive to me btw.

padders

You can tell from looking at them, the earlier tritium models have lume that is much more beige in colour and usually the hands and dial have faded to different colours. Omega switched from tritium to SL at the end of 1997 so if the watch is truly from 2000 (and didn’t sit on the shelf for 3 years before selling) it will be using SL.

it sounds pretty expensive to me btw.

padders

You can tell from looking at them, the earlier tritium models have lume that is much more beige in colour and usually the hands and dial have faded to different colours. Omega switched from tritium to SL at the end of 1997 so if the watch is truly from 2000 (and didn’t sit on the shelf for 3 years before selling) it will be using SL.

it sounds pretty expensive to me btw.

Snooz

My 41mm Seamaster 300m is from '99 - 6020 serial number and has the tritium dial/hands/bezel insert - if you search around on chrono24/eBay there are a few from '99 with the tritium instead of SL - I guess it's all speculation as to how these tritium dials ended up on watches made after '97...I've never been able to find a definitive answer? I even saw a full size seamaster quartz with 2006 papers and tritium dial recently sold on eBay - very odd indeed..😵‍💫

Edit - having looked at the watch with 2006 papers again, seems it's a 595 serial so guess it took a long time to sell!