Hello there!

Just joined as I've wanted a vintage Seamaster for a while and I'm getting closer to taking the plunge. I've spotted this one on Ebay and I wanted some opinions if possible. It says it's an original dial and with the seller having immaculate feedback I'm inclined to think it's a very nice watch.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/151200513837Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

Do you think it's ok, and what would you think it's worth?

Also, something I've been wondering having never owned a decent watch before, is are these watches simple enough to get serviced even if you don't have the original paperwork?

Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

 

Servicing is no issue for these. Any competent watchmaker should be able to do it. You don't often see watches from this era with the paperwork anyway.

It looks like a good watch. The reference 14.910 doesn't show up in the vintage database so I can't tell if the crown is correct or not, but that's no big deal. I like it up to $600 / £365 / €440. If you really want it there's no harm in paying a smidge more though.

 

An OK watch which appears mostly correct.

Far from rare, actually very common.

The crown is not correct, wrong style for this watch, the case shows some polishing (not a good thing) and the dial shows some distinct aging, far from mint or pristine as described.

For every time the seller has used the word "rare" I'd take off $25, absolutely nothing rare about this watch.

Wait for a UK based member to chime in re value, since prices are lower for these here in the US.

 

That's great info, thanks for that I'll see how high it goes in the next few days and will be posting soon if I win it!

One other thing - it says the crystal has been replaced. Is this an issue?

 

The crystal is regarded as a service replacement part, and it is normal (and desirable) to fit a new one when the original has had its day. As Norm says, these watches are far from rare, and I think you could do a lot better than this if the style is what you want. This dial in particular has the dreaded "spots" - on watches of this era these spots are caused by corrosion of the dial metal underneath the finish layer, and they cannot be fixed or removed. What you will find is that at some angles this corrosion looks not too bad, but in other lights and angles it looks dreadful. I had a Seamaster with this problem (but superb in all other respects) and it drove me crazy and I ended up selling it at a loss.

 

Thanks for the above comments - I think I'm going to leave that one and keep looking. One I've got my eye on is this:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/181294197617?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

I've contacted the seller and he said it was serviced five years ago when he bought it. Does anything look out of order here? With my (very) untrained eye I would guess it's been polished. Does it look like it has been redialed?

He's also got this one up for sale:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/vintage-o...es_Watches_MensWatches_GL&hash=item2a35f99cdcPurchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network

But there is less information on this and no picture of the movement.

Again I'd appreciate any input! Thanks.

 

On the first, the one I'm more interested in, it appears the words Omega and Automatic, or the Omega logo, are slightly out of alignment. It looks like they're slightly too far to the left. Is this very common? I wouldn't have thought so myself.

 

RS - we're not ignoring you, just thinking about it.

The dial on #1, the ref 2577 Seamaster, has the correct script and "Swiss Made" in the right sort of places, but the dial does look awfully fresh, there is no hint of the two-tone finish these dials usually have, and it looks to have been re-lumed. Worse than that, in my view, is the fact that the case has pierced lugs and therefore should be a very early 2577 (ca 1949-50) with a cal 351 in it. But it has in fact a cal 354 and the case back is 2577-11. I have a 2577-8 sitting here on my desk and it does not have pierced lugs. So the case back may be a replacement, as well.

Watch #2 has the wrong crown and is not gold-plated, but gold-capped. You can see this by the way the lugs are not gold-coloured underneath, but steel. Now, this shows that the seller does not know much about watches and Omega, because gold-capped is preferable to plate and is in fact a selling point which he screws up on. So I would not be inclined to trust much else that he says, either. When you look at it carefully, you can see that the case is badly worn in places, and has been heavily polished to try and disguise the wear. The dial on this one looks rather fresh, too.

 

Thanks John, I wasn't getting impatient - just looking and put another observation down I also had suspicions about the dial after looking at the Omega archive. Another one bites the dust!

I'll keep trawling but not much else on the bay that looks too promising at the moment. I feel this will take some time to get the right one.

Thanks again for your help!

 

That's fine, but remember this is just my opinion - there are loads of Forum Folk here who are much more expert than me. Probably they will chime in too, perhaps with different views