Hi all

I spoke with a very friendly private watch collector about my desire for an early Seamaster chronograph. He sent me a couple of pictures of some watches he was willing to sell and this 105.005 caught my eye. This watch is very high on my list.

This is why I am asking for a a double check with the experts even though I am quite sure it is a redial for the following reasons

1. The tachymeter looks different than the other examples I have seen.
2. The subdials also looked quite different than all other examples I had seen.
3. It has a coat hanger S, even though it is allegedly from 65. From my understanding these were swapped for the regular S in around ‘62
4. The Omega logo off to me Especially the narrow A

So basically just wanted to double check with you guys, to ensure I’m not missing out on a super mega rare special dial that has yet to be seen on the world wide web?

As always, your help is really appreciated

 

Just out of curiosity, what’s the asking price?

 

If the watch was offered to you by a fellow collector, was the redial mentioned at all? A Danish collector?

 

Hands are also wrong IMO, can you guys confirm this?

 

Thank you very much for confirming my suspicion @MSNWatch and @dsio.

@77deluxe the seller asked for 3k USD. Which I think is a fair asking price, had everything looked proper.

 

Good question @ConElPueblo

I asked the seller if the dial had had any work done. He said he believed it to be correct and that he had checked with his watchmaker (who as far as I can tell is fairly reputable when it comes to vintage Omega and he's also an Omega AD). This is what threw me a bit.

I can't say whether this is the truth, but the seller also on his own accord disclosed that he movement had been replaced and wasn't original to the watch. This would have been hard for me to confirm without an extract, which gives him some credibility. But when even a noob like me can see something is off, then I don't see how a 'reputable' watchmaker can be in doubt.

Hoping a nice example surfaces in the markeplace here soon

 

I am not sure about the hands @Passover. When I did research these hands did come up for this reference, albeit not the most common ones. Would love to know more if anyone has some info on this.

 

How about you subtract 0.002 more from this reference and buy that instead very nice examples of that on this forum!

But in all seriousness... good examples do surface here time to time. Patience is key in vintage watches - don't learn it the hard way!

 

@ext1 The piggy bank doesn't support such a decision unfortunately . Would love that Speedy.

And yes, patiency and diligency seem to be key factors. Plus a bunch of reading on this forum

 

Could be he wasn't aware himself - that he discloses the movement shows some credibility at least

I can't think of many watchmakers who I'd want to evaluate dial originality... I'd prefer collector nerds on here for that job any day

 

@ConElPueblo I do actually think he believes the dial is original. Now the question is how I convey my findings to him in a gentle way.

 

Hi,

did a quick search myself, for this reference I found only two kind of hands, either black inlays or lume.

If you like you can send me the ones you found by PM, it's possible that I'm wrong of course

 

He’s a dealer, be as blunt as a axe offer him $200

 

The 105.005 usually has markers at 3, 6 and 9 as well, so this seems a bit strange, too. I've seen a few pictures without, however, so I could be wrong. Given the issues with the dial and the movement, I'd pass anyway.

 

You can grab a series of web pics of the same calibre and make your case, and your points can be done constructively. Some people would say run, and if this is grail then I whole heartedly agree. But if you are just looking for a "cool watch", this is up there as a cool non collector in my book...but then make an offer accordingly. If $3k is fair market for one of these in decent shape and all original, I would make an offer on the sum of the parts....the real ones at least.

 

Weeeeeell, in all fairness he’s a private collector and not a dealer. Think many of us would be sad to hear that a watch we owned was a redial. And it seemed like he did as well.

 

@JwRosenthal I don’t think what i was willing to pay matched what this watch could be sold for to people with less critical eyes. I would not mind a redial if the price was right and the redial matched the original design of the dial. But here, there were simply too many things off. Dial, movement, markers, polished case and probably also wrong hands if @Passover if right.