- Posts
- 880
- Likes
- 1,691
SM 166025 SC-62 with a 18k striped dial
- Posts
- 335
- Likes
- 999
aprax
·
Good job, that is indeed convincing. Ref. 14742 seems to be equally scarce though.
- Posts
- 335
- Likes
- 999
aprax
·For clarity, a UK made case (if it utilised the Omega numbering system) would not have the 5 at the end of the reference., it would be inserted into the full Omega reference.
These cases are not assembled out of a Swiss movt and English case.
In the first two examples the cases are Swiss made cases imported by OWC (Omega in the UK)
There must have been some tax advantages to this method of import.
normally you can order an extract of the archives from Omega (for around €120) but this service is currently not available.
... and if it is any help, since my original post I did indeed order an extract. So that watch is indeed reference BA 166.025, Seamaster model, was produced on April 24, 1964 and was delivered to the United Kingdom.
- Posts
- 880
- Likes
- 1,691
PlainVanilla
·... and if it is any help, since my original post I did indeed order an extract. So that watch is indeed reference BA 166.025, Seamaster model, was produced on April 24, 1964 and was delivered to the United Kingdom.
The letters 'BA' before a reference number means 'yellow gold'. Did you check my thread about Seamaster de Ville watches?
https://omegaforums.net/threads/the-ultimate-seamaster-de-ville-thread.159035/
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
NeilA
·... and if it is any help, since my original post I did indeed order an extract. So that watch is indeed reference BA 166.025, Seamaster model, was produced on April 24, 1964 and was delivered to the United Kingdom.
Hi @aprax thanks for your original and recent post. It seems 166.025 is a rare model ! How and where would I go to get ‘extract’ information for my watch. Also, do you feel this ‘rare’ model adds value the the watch? Regards, Neil
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
NeilA
·Hi @PlainVanilla , I believe when you originally wrote this you had thought following the same logic, it was 14742 and/or 14743 that became ref 166.025:
I searched omegawatches.com vintage section for 14742 (no results) and 14743: which came up with a photo and description exactly the same as my watch ! 14743 did indeed appear to be a “ 18k gold, rare, 562” watch line 1960-62, that must have changed to 166.025 SC-62 in 1963. See photos from the Omega website below. Regards
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
NeilA
·Hi @PlainVanilla , I believe when you originally wrote this you had thought following the same logic, it was 14742 and/or 14743 that became ref 166.025:
I searched omegawatches.com vintage section for 14742 (no results) and 14743: which came up with a photo and description exactly the same as my watch ! 14743 did indeed appear to be a “ 18k gold, rare, 562” watch line 1960-62, that must have changed to 166.025 SC-62 in 1963. See photos from the Omega website below. Regards
- Posts
- 880
- Likes
- 1,691
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
NeilA
·What is your feeling:
14742 denotes crocodile strap (and could have optional date) ?
14743 denotes gold bracelet w/without date?)
E.g. is the reference number last digit denoting the date / no date option, or strap/bracelet option?
14742 denotes crocodile strap (and could have optional date) ?
14743 denotes gold bracelet w/without date?)
E.g. is the reference number last digit denoting the date / no date option, or strap/bracelet option?
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
NeilA
·here’s a pic / some description of the 14742 I found. No gold bracelet, not date, and I’ve just noticed the movement is 552 - meaning this is a different watch to 14743 (which has 562 movement). I now believe the 3 watches 166025 SC-62 are all 14743.
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
NeilA
·
- Posts
- 335
- Likes
- 999
aprax
·We should be careful with using the word "rare" when referring to Omega Seamaster watches which were generally produced in big numbers. It might be that this reference, which came only in 18k, was more prone to land at the smelters and so relatively few may have survived today. I don't think value is affected. After all, reference 166.020 is quite similar.
As to the extracts, Omega has suspended that service. It is supposed to be temporary. So we'll have to wait and see.
- Posts
- 335
- Likes
- 999
aprax
·The letters 'BA' before a reference number means 'yellow gold'. Did you check my thread about Seamaster de Ville watches?
https://omegaforums.net/threads/the-ultimate-seamaster-de-ville-thread.159035/
That is an excellent thread, and aptly named 👍
- Posts
- 6,065
- Likes
- 9,380
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersAlso, 14742 was sold on a crocodile strap and 14743 came with a 18K gold bracelet.
Most watches were sold with a strap and the buyer had the option of purchasing a bracelet at the point of sale.
The way you have put the quote above suggests that the references (in part at least) refer to the strap/bracelet that they came on. (like some modern Omega watch references do)
So, for anyone looking into these references in future - It would be really useful (and interesting) if you could include any evidence you have that the 14742 was sold with a strap and 14743 only came on a gold bracelet.
- Posts
- 6,065
- Likes
- 9,380
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersWe should be careful with using the word "rare".
I don't think value is affected..
This.
Unfortunately, sellers often use the word 'rare' when trying to hype their watches for sale.
Uncommon is a much better word.
As for value, rare/uncommon doesn't necessarily mean valuable -but it can give a collector a warm fuzzy feeling of pleasure to know they own something special.
- Posts
- 880
- Likes
- 1,691
PlainVanilla
·Most watches were sold with a strap and the buyer had the option of purchasing a bracelet at the point of sale.
The way you have put the quote above suggests that the references (in part at least) refer to the strap/bracelet that they came on. (like some modern Omega watch references do)
So, for anyone looking into these references in future - It would be really useful (and interesting) if you could include any evidence you have that the 14742 was sold with a strap and 14743 only came on a gold bracelet.
Concerning 14743:
14743 (the big visual) is presented as a 18K solid gold watch on a 18K solid gold bracelet, with BA 14770 being the equivalent with a crocodile strap. I believe that 14742 is the no-date version of BA 14770.
Some additional info:
- 14742 and 14743 were only produced in solid gold,
- 14770 was produced in all materials (steel, gold cap, solid gold),
- The letters 'BA' before a reference number mean solid yellow gold,
- This is an English catalogue, hence the presence of English reference numbers. In reality, the English BA 3665801 and the Swiss 14743 wich are presented as the same watch were made by different manufacturers. They are presented as equivalent references because they are both 18K solid gold automatic date watches sold on a 18K solid gold bracelet.
- Posts
- 6,065
- Likes
- 9,380
Peemacgee
··Purrrr-veyor of luxury cat box loungersalso interesting to see the BA 1665020 reference alongside the 14770 reference - the former most likely a Dennison gold case.
- Posts
- 880
- Likes
- 1,691
PlainVanilla
·also interesting to see the BA 1665020 reference alongside the 14770 reference - the former most likely a Dennison gold case.
Absolutely, it is a Dennison case. It is interesting to see English reference numbers alongside their Swiss counterparts.
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
NeilA
·We should be careful with using the word "rare"
We should be careful with using the word "rare" when referring to Omega Seamaster watches which were generally produced in big numbers. It might be that this reference, which came only in 18k, was more prone to land at the smelters and so relatively few may have survived today. I don't think value is affected. After all, reference 166.020 is quite similar.
As to the extracts, Omega has suspended that service. It is supposed to be temporary. So we'll have to wait and see.
My bad; for using the the word ‘rare’. As stated early in I’m new here, and new to Omega ownership. I’d only found one reference (yours, here) to 166025 on the web, followed by much conjecture rather than facts about this reference number. Seemingly, ‘we have only found 3 examples of 166025 in the universe. Others on here have said “low production run”, “produced in low numbers”, “equally scarce” (ref 14742/3), and even on the official Omega website 14743 described as “rare”. I also find it difficult to believe that “relatively few may have survived” (of these ‘high end 18mm watches - am I allowed to say high end?) because they’ve been smelted down.
mince more, my apologies.
- Posts
- 14
- Likes
- 3
Similar threads
- Posts
- 3
- Views
- 2K
- Posts
- 23
- Views
- 6K
- Posts
- 12
- Views
- 4K