Hi, everyone. I have just purchased a Seamaster 300m and, although the watch looks great, I was wondering if I should open it up to check for possible water infiltration it could have had in the past.
So my questions are 1) is it worth opening it up? The seller said it was serviced in Oct 2014, and 2) if there was a past water infiltration, would I be able to see any effect on the arms and dial? 3) last but not least, what do you think of the conditions of the watch? I am not an expert but the watch looks legit.
Thanks!

 

He could not find the receipt of the service so I cannot be100% sure

 

Then you should only wear it above water until you can get an inspection and a water tightness test after replacing the seals.

If you open it yourself to "inspect" it you will then need to get it serviced or seals and testing or all three.

Better safe than sorry.

 

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too and that's why I was on the edge about opening it. I never swim or get my watches wet so that wouldn't be a problem. The seller said the watch was serviced but there is no proof of that. Is it worth taking it to a watchmaker or should I just wait another 2 and a half years for that?

 

It looks great and there's no sign of damage to the dial, plus from the outside it looks like it was owned by someone who took reasonable care of it. I've got watches that were serviced but I can't prove it - it happens. It's natural to try and cover all bases when buying something expensive that you don't know everything about, but unless your seller seemed in some way unreliable I don't see any reason to worry. If you're really bothered, you could always ask him whether he went swimming with it.

 

I would not... if works well, for what touching?

 

This is an example of Schrodinger's watch. The watch is currently in an indeterminate state oscillating between fine and water damaged. If you choose to open the watch and render it susceptible to water damage then the probability wave collapses to the water damaged outcome. I love physics me.

In English, don't be daft, get it checked professionally. Oh and when a seller claims a service but can't prove it, it is best to assume they are either lying or at best being forgetful about the fact it was actually last serviced and tested in 2007 or so (as an extreme example). Bear in mind that watch was built sometime between 1994 and 1996 (as can be seen from the tritium dial) so if it hasn't been serviced recently it probably really needs it.

 

Really nice watch, especially the dial!

 

When I wear this shirt people often ask me why I hate cats...

Although I am certainly not a fan of cats, in particular when they roam my back yard killing birds and small animals for fun, that clearly has nothing to do with the shirt.

 

Alright everyone, thanks for the advice. I have just got the watch and It is in great conditions. I initially thought the mid-size would have been small but it looks wonderful. Going in for a quick visit to the watchmaker this week.

 

There is a massive plus with that model and the other polished bezel models such as the 2255/2265 in that with care the insert can be polished or Cape-Codded back to good as new whereas the anodised ones on the 2531 or 2254 etc are toast once scratched and mighty expensive to replace.

 

Hi Padders, you say the watch was made between 1994 and 1996 but the serial# is 60xxxxxx. Not That I care much if it was made in 1994 or 1999 but I was reading that the early Seamaster 300m had a movement other than 1120. Am I correct thinking the watch was made in 1999ish? and has the 1120 movement?

 

The reason I dated it when I did was 2-fold. Firstly that variant is an early one and I haven't seen them from beyond 1998 or so and secondly yours obviously has a tritium dial (see how the dial plots have faded slightly darker than the hands, normal for a tritium SMP), Omega transitioned over to tritium in 1997 so yours must be earlier. The very first year of production 1993-4 used the earlier movement 1109 from memory but then on they used 1120 so yours could well be a 1995/6. Hence my estimation of age.

I know that it seems odd that yours seemingly has a later serial but at various times Omega serials, which are really movement serials, can get a bit out of sync. I have several 60m pieces with papers over several years. I think maybe they make a batch of movements and generate the serials that way then use them over a period of years. Online lists of serial numbers by year aren't always a reliable way to date Omegas like this exactly. There are often big jumps in serial ranges with Omegas . For SMPs 60-61m jumps quickly to 80m in the early 2000s with nothing in between yet Speedmasters were at 77-78m for about 6-8 years. I have a tritium dial auto with 1997 papers (poss made earlier) with a 60m serial and a quartz which was made in 1998 (confirmed by Omega) with 55m serial. As I say, serials are not not an easy guide.

 

I guess the only way to know if it has the 1120 or the 1109 movement is to take it to a watchmaker?

 

They are pretty similar anyhow, I wouldn't lose sleep over it.