- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 0
Seamaster gold bracelet?
- Posts
- 2,714
- Likes
- 3,616
Donn Chambers
·Nope. Would have come on a gold Bond-style bracelet. That one is not original, nor Omega as far as I can tell.
- Posts
- 824
- Likes
- 1,399
8100_RPM
·Yeah, those gaps are horrible. 
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 0
Vodice
·Guess my suspicion was right.
Seller also claims this is a Limited Edition for the 1994 Olympics.
With ref 26312153 16 on warranty card.
Says "LIMITED EDTION FOR 1994 OLYMPICS xx/49"on caseback.
But the dial doesnt look correct. I thought these had the olympic sign and swiss cross on the dial.
Maybe seller, or someone earlier, replaced dial and put on an non Omega gold bracelet?
Seller also claims this is a Limited Edition for the 1994 Olympics.
With ref 26312153 16 on warranty card.
Says "LIMITED EDTION FOR 1994 OLYMPICS xx/49"on caseback.
But the dial doesnt look correct. I thought these had the olympic sign and swiss cross on the dial.
Maybe seller, or someone earlier, replaced dial and put on an non Omega gold bracelet?
- Posts
- 984
- Likes
- 1,122
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 0
Vodice
·
Yeah I saw that.
But the size is 43,40mm on the BA 368-1503 "mine" is 41 mm.
The wavepattern on "mine" isnt as disticnt as on the BA 368-1503.
But the size is 43,40mm on the BA 368-1503 "mine" is 41 mm.
The wavepattern on "mine" isnt as disticnt as on the BA 368-1503.
- Posts
- 10,451
- Likes
- 16,344
padders
··Oooo subtitles!Yeah I saw that.
But the size is 43,40mm on the BA 368-1503 "mine" is 41 mm.
The wavepattern on "mine" isnt as disticnt as on the BA 368-1503.
- Posts
- 996
- Likes
- 1,864
Wetworks
·Love when the bezels are rotated so you can't line up the He valves lol. Case and dial actually look pretty legit. A front shot with the 60m bezel marker at 12 would help
- Posts
- 29,705
- Likes
- 76,892
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerGuess my suspicion was right.
Seller also claims this is a Limited Edition for the 1994 Olympics.
With ref 26312153 16 on warranty card.
Says "LIMITED EDTION FOR 1994 OLYMPICS xx/49"on caseback.
But the dial doesnt look correct. I thought these had the olympic sign and swiss cross on the dial.
Maybe seller, or someone earlier, replaced dial and put on an non Omega gold bracelet?
Well, the ref. 26312153 is not an LE of any kind - just a regular gold Seamaster. It would have been sold originally on a blue shark skin strap, not a bracelet.
For the size, this is the case spec:
REF : 055BA1681503
WATER-RESISTANCE : 30 bar
CALIBRE : 1109
DIAMETER : 43.00 MM
Cheers, Al
- Posts
- 9,596
- Likes
- 27,706
ConElPueblo
·Love when the bezels are rotated so you can't line up the He valves lol. Case and dial actually look pretty legit. A front shot with the 60m bezel marker at 12 would help
If you really are in doubt, draw a line from the 4 to the 10 marker and see. I see nothing about this one that suggests that it is a fake.
- Posts
- 996
- Likes
- 1,864
Wetworks
·If you really are in doubt, draw a line from the 4 to the 10 marker and see. I see nothing about this one that suggests that it is a fake.
Terrific point! I agree, I think it is real as well.
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 0
Vodice
·That is a typo, or they have included the crown. All 168.1503 or 368.1503 cases are 41mm AFAIK. To be sure, get the caseback removed and see what is stamped on the underside. The one shown in the post above is your watch, does the inscription on yours look to be added by hand? It is just possible your is a genuine factory LE release but even if it is, it has seen a pretty hard life so I can't see it adding much if any extra value over what is already a rare watch. I would be interested to see the warranty card you mentioned above. That might help us to shed some more light on it.
No inscription is not added by hand.
Now that you mention value. Roughly, what iyou think the value is?
Added a pic of warranty card. What are you looking for?( Maybe I can learn something).
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 0
- Posts
- 10,451
- Likes
- 16,344
padders
··Oooo subtitles!All the google links seem to be the same watch, no 23/49 which has clearly changed hands a few times so bear in mind that is only one other data point.
I wanted to see the card to see if you had quoted the model reference properly as it is in a different format to the PIC codes normally seen in the 1990s but it seems that is indeed correct. I would have expected a 4.2.2 format but when you search on 2631.21.53 you get nothing. If that was a factory LE then I would have expected something on the cards indicating this and maybe a special box but I guess these may have got mislaid if indeed they ever existed.
I wouldn't like to comment on the value of that. It has rarity but the condition isn't great and gold divers watches always seem a little like a contradiction in terms (unless you want it for negative wrist buoyancy!).
What you have is a bit of a head scratcher. Archer has access to the Omega extranet so you can rely on what he says pretty well since it is what Omega says in essence. The Extranet data on the ref seems to suggest it isn't an LE but your watch and the one shown on google have and LE inscription and the other has the Olympics dial so you may be right. Unless yours is the same one that is! I wonder if the dealer did their own local LE of 50 in a DeMarchi style.
I wanted to see the card to see if you had quoted the model reference properly as it is in a different format to the PIC codes normally seen in the 1990s but it seems that is indeed correct. I would have expected a 4.2.2 format but when you search on 2631.21.53 you get nothing. If that was a factory LE then I would have expected something on the cards indicating this and maybe a special box but I guess these may have got mislaid if indeed they ever existed.
I wouldn't like to comment on the value of that. It has rarity but the condition isn't great and gold divers watches always seem a little like a contradiction in terms (unless you want it for negative wrist buoyancy!).
What you have is a bit of a head scratcher. Archer has access to the Omega extranet so you can rely on what he says pretty well since it is what Omega says in essence. The Extranet data on the ref seems to suggest it isn't an LE but your watch and the one shown on google have and LE inscription and the other has the Olympics dial so you may be right. Unless yours is the same one that is! I wonder if the dealer did their own local LE of 50 in a DeMarchi style.
Edited:
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 0
Vodice
·All the google links seem to be the same watch, no 23/49 which has clearly changed hands a few times so bear in mind that is only one other data point.
I wanted to see the card to see if you had quoted the model reference properly as it is in a different format to the PIC codes normally seen in the 1990s but it seems that is indeed correct. I would have expected a 4.2.2 format but when you search on 2631.21.53 you get nothing. If that was a factory LE then I would have expected something on the cards indicating this and maybe a special box but I guess these may have got mislaid if indeed they ever existed.
I wouldn't like to comment on the value of that. It has rarity but the condition isn't great and gold divers watches always seem a little like a contradiction in terms (unless you want it for negative wrist buoyancy!).
What you have is a bit of a head scratcher. Archer has access to the Omega extranet so you can rely on what he says pretty well since it is what Omega says in essence. The Extranet data on the ref seems to suggest it isn't an LE but your watch and the one shown on google have and LE inscription and the other has the Olympics dial so you may be right. Unless yours is the same one that is! I wonder if the dealer did their own local LE of 50 in a DeMarchi style.
The watch comes with special box with two extra straps. Same box as in the one on Google has.
Limited number is not 23/49 so not the same watch.
What puzzles me is the dial.
I know Omega gave the athletes of the swiss olympic team watches beside the limited editions.
Can this be one of them?
- Posts
- 29,705
- Likes
- 76,892
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerAre you sure.
When I Google ref 26312153 only Limetid Editions show up.
As noted, I'm looking this up on the Omega Extranet, so directly with Omega, not Google. I am as sure as Omega is, I guess you could say.
Description from the Extranet:
W SE DIV 300M I/II/III 43 YG WHIT
REF 26312153
The case has no special marking on the back - it is a bog standard regular case back with hippocampus. Nothing at all indicates this is an LE of any kind.
The only way you would get to the bottom of what this watch actually is, is to get an Extract of the Archive from Omega, but of course that will cost you some money and time.
Cheers, Al
- Posts
- 7
- Likes
- 0
Vodice
·As noted, I'm looking this up on the Omega Extranet, so directly with Omega, not Google. I am as sure as Omega is, I guess you could say.
Description from the Extranet:
W SE DIV 300M I/II/III 43 YG WHIT
REF 26312153
The case has no special marking on the back - it is a bog standard regular case back with hippocampus. Nothing at all indicates this is an LE of any kind.
The only way you would get to the bottom of what this watch actually is, is to get an Extract of the Archive from Omega, but of course that will cost you some money and time.
Cheers, Al
Thnx for taking the time to answer.
I guees I haveto contact Omega themself because unfortunately the Omega Extranet doesnt seem to be absolutely correct.
Found some info on other watch site where somebody got info from a Omegadealer.
https://www.watchprosite.com/?page=wf.forumpost&q=&fi=677&ti=486291&pi=2917971
He also posted broschyrs that indicates that ref numbers are correct.
- Posts
- 29,705
- Likes
- 76,892
Archer
··Omega Qualified WatchmakerThnx for taking the time to answer.
I guees I haveto contact Omega themself because unfortunately the Omega Extranet doesnt seem to be absolutely correct.
Found some info on other watch site where somebody got info from a Omegadealer.
https://www.watchprosite.com/?page=wf.forumpost&q=&fi=677&ti=486291&pi=2917971
He also posted broschyrs that indicates that ref numbers are correct.
Sorry, I don't see a PIC 26312153 listed on that other site in the first post. The reference numbers posted there are incomplete.
I don't see it on the brochure you attached photos of either...
Again, you will need to pay up and get an extract of the archives using the serial number - that will be the only way to confirm if what you have is legit at all or not.
