hi Friends, I saw this 2576 on the net. Usually I would rate this dial as a redone one, essentially because the seamaster logo...
... but I saw recently a watch posted by @ConElPueblo (if I’m not mistaken) that change my certainty...
I’m so wondering, What is the correct logo for a late 40 / early 50 seamaster?!? And more: how could it helps to identify a redial?
That have with this watch not so much to do. It is only an example to learn something more. If the hands was in patina with the dial, what you s said about the watch?
The edges are too soft? Finish is wicking up the sides of the logo? Or just wrong logo / dial combination? I can't tell from the pick.
The "S" on Seamaster on the first pic is a later version than your second pic. Omega changed it in 1959 (?) This is mine from '54. Coat hanger "S" vs the round "S".
@Dan S I tried to look for a thread, but I got nothing... @redpcar so the first watch (rated as a ‘55) is a redial one? A well do job under my opinion...
The seamaster font on the 2576 you posted is totally legit. Lemme pull up a pic of mine... Oh yeah and normal for hands to show more wear than dial from my limited experience.
Ask the seller to adjust the hands to 9:15 so we can see the "Seamaster" more clearly. Unless the price was right, I would move on. Hands in that condition cause me great concern. Why put a shiny dial behind rusted / crusted hands? If you are going through the trouble of putting together a watch and taking nice pics in a photo box, why not take care of the hands?
But yours is like neither 1st or 2d OP's pic. "S" is different in each one. Mine (1954) seems to to be like OP's second pic: