Hey guys here is my review of this watch. Please feel free to correct me or point out things that I have stated wrong or things I missed. Thanks Year 1954 Dial - original markers, paint maybe original but hard to tell, missing lum on markers, writing has been redone Hands- look like original omega hands but wrong watch? Lum on dial no lum on hands? Case - looks slightly over polished on lugs not bad but they are a little rounded Crown - non omega, aftermarket? Movement - looks ok has not been serviced in awhile, looks like might be rubbing on rotor weight hard to tell however case back does not show signs of rubbing? Movement year 1955 Confused by the case back as there is no model number 2828-1 does not turn anything up? Not a great watch, pretty worn. Thanks guys
Hey Dan thanks so much never realized the vintage ones were on Omega site. Question for you how did you search it up? I tried a number of searches on that site to get to that page and could not find that info. Thanks
Agree the printing it terrible. In the earlier years was Seamaster spelled with 3 humps. I have seen a lot of redials with 3 humps wondering if that is an oversight on the redial or something they did is the early years?
Variations in Seamaster scripts is probably something you should familiarize yourself with. It varies over the years. Also, I suspect the hands on your posted watch are original and contained radium lume. You caught the redial and well done there, but the case and movement look quite tired as well. In short: correct watch, incorrect crown, redial, hard pass.
Thanks mebreen, Would you have any suggestions on how to familiarize myself with Seamaster scripts? I did a little google search and really could not find anything aside from the usually “ different vendors different scripts”. I’m guessing I’m not the only one that asks this question as I see lots of posts regarding redials. It might be a good idea to have a sticky thread like the gone fishing thread that specifically gives a discussion about the fonts and different Seamaster text over the vintage years. I would be willing to work on this to collect examples of redials like the ones above and examples of original ones over the vintage years pointing out the differences over the years but would obviously need help cause I’m no expert. Lol Or is there just to many variations to consider? Just a thought.
Google is your friend. As an example, if you search for: "166.0077" on the omega site you'll get nothing but if you run this query on Google- site: omegawatches.com 166.0077 it'll be the first result on the page (there should not be a sapce after the ":" but it turns it into an emojy here so I had to do it this way). This method is useful to run a search within sites: site:[name of the site here] [what you are searching for]
I'd say that small variations in the printing is not your primary concern. You would have to learn to assess the overall condition of a watch first. In this example, a pitted case, corroded hands, movement that suffered from obvious moisture exposure but a stark white/black dial with very low quality printing : what does that tell you? You really don't need to know the various kinds of Seamaster scripts to detect a redial here... some are tricky do detect but if you fall for this one, you still have some basics to learn. Persevere!
Thanks guys for the help. I totally understand S.H. Honestly I was not considering this watch just using it as a learning tool to see if what I see is accurate and if the little I have learned so far is correct. It’s hard when one doesn’t have the knowledge or background that people like yourselves have when looking at buying vintage watches. It’s a very steep learning curve with lots to learn. That’s why I said not a great watch in the first post. It’s not easy because you can’t just walk into a shop and talk to some guy and say hey can you show me these 25 vintage Omega Seamaster watches you have and tell me all about the differences and which ones are better then others which ones are fakes and which ones are, redials etc etc etc. Lol Hmmm might be a good idea for a business vintage watch school. Lol I have been searching google and this forum but that’s hard to as I have asked for opinions on a watch and had three different opinions on wether the crown was original. I really appreciate your guys help and patience when dealing with us newbies. I’ve been here long enough to see how many guys you get that pop in and say is this a good deal or a fake? So I understand it can get trying hearing the same questions over and over. I will try my best to persevere and learn but I apologize in advance for the stupid questions and posts that you will see from me. Lol Thanks again to everyone.
Oh geez, Speaking of mistakes I just noticed I posted this in the modern watch thread not where it was suppose to be in vintage. Sheesh sorry guys told you the mistakes were still to come! Lol