Forums Latest Members
  1. keepschanging Jan 2, 2016

    Posts
    391
    Likes
    936
    <thread deleted>
     
    untitled.png
    Edited Jan 2, 2016
  2. JimInOz Melbourne Australia Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    15,489
    Likes
    32,371
    Well I saw the original post and went to my files to see if i could offer some advice. Found some good pics of my watch that's very similar and a heap more info on these variants.

    Now see the post is deleted so I'll keep all of the info for next time.
     
    CanberraOmega likes this.
  3. ahsposo Most fun screen name at ΩF Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    3,745
    Likes
    19,993
    And I keep all of my interest for the next time.

    Oh, the anticipa
     
  4. alam Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    8,095
    Likes
    18,682

    I have new powers! I can see deleted! wohoo!
     
    Screen shot 2016-01-03 at 9.59.29 AM.png
    chronos likes this.
  5. STANDY schizophrenic pizza orderer and watch collector Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    16,351
    Likes
    44,920
    Then at least tell us what watch it was :whistling:
     
  6. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,790
    176.007

    I've been looking at a lovely 1972 Seamaster Yachting, which I think has model ref. ST 176.0007. But I'm a bit worried that some parts may be from a different model.

    A quick google search gives you some pictures:
    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=omega ST 176.0007&biw=1920&bih=969&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjbp-Xb7ozKAhVl5aYKHdvoD4EQ_AUICCgD#

    I've added one of the best pics to this thread, not sure if will appear above or below this text. You'll see it has a silver dial.

    However, the seller has provided a picture of the inside of the caseback of the version I'm looking at. This has two reference numbers. In the middle it states 176.001. Below that it states 176.007 - ie with TWO zeros not THREE. I think the 176.007 might have been a different model, maybe with a blue dial instead of silver.

    So I'm a bit worried that the caseback is from a different model, ie it's a frankenwatch.

    Could anyone help me get an idea?

    Would be much appreciate

    :D
     
    George.A and STANDY like this.
  7. PatrickJ Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    1,567
    Likes
    858
    Whatever it was must of been serious to delete the thread.
     
  8. UncleBuck understands the decision making hierarchy Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    3,420
    Likes
    7,745
    Probably realized he had just advertised it to 5 billion people on the web!
     
  9. Tony C. Ωf Jury member Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    7,385
    Likes
    24,214
    reminds me of this gem:

    [​IMG]
     
    Kim likes this.
  10. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,790
    BTW , the caseback is fine
     
  11. PatrickJ Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    1,567
    Likes
    858
    Was it a fake watch?
     
  12. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,790
    Patrick, what makes you say that??
     
  13. Andy K Dreaming about winning an OFfie one day. Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    1,819
    Likes
    5,885
    Did he edit the thread before deleting? The first time I read it I though he said it was identical to the one in this old WUS FS ad.
    He asked if it was a franken - and in a way that one is - the bezel is for a GP yachting. The question as was written was confusing though because he described a typical 007 caseback with 001 crossed out. A Yachting caseback would say 176.010.
     
    Geo! likes this.
  14. PatrickJ Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    1,567
    Likes
    858
    A wild guess. I have never seen a deleted thread before unless it was doubled up.
     
  15. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,790
    Yes , I believe he figured this all out for himself and then decided to delete (edit) the substance of his post. However, that is generally not the way we work around here as it deprives others from learning from the whole experience.
     
    Davidt, UncleBuck and Andy K like this.
  16. cicindela Steve @ ΩF Staff Member Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    15,047
    Likes
    23,790
    The thread is not actually deleted. The OP merely edited his thread to read <thread deleted>
    If the thread were deleted we would not be writing in it now :p
     
    STANDY likes this.
  17. jud Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    613
    Likes
    325
    I enjoy this forum, even deleted questions get answered for the good of the group.
     
    STANDY, Garv, alam and 4 others like this.
  18. Rman Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    2,416
    Likes
    9,563
    Thank you for doing this.
     
    Edited Jan 4, 2016
  19. alam Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    8,095
    Likes
    18,682
    I got a good laugh from this one! We'll answer ALL questions! LOL!
     
  20. keepschanging Jan 3, 2016

    Posts
    391
    Likes
    936
    Lol much appreciated guys - yeah I tried to delete the thread because I realised these are somewhat rare and I just advertised it to the whole community of potential purchasers. Couldn't see any way of actually deleting it so I just wrote 'deleted post'. To a mixture of controversy and amusement all around lol

    Anyway, I have attached a few pics of the watch from the advertisement including that strange caseback. It's being sold by Casowatches in Italy. From what I read they are a reputable seller, and they are telling me the watch is entirely original.

    But it seems some of you disagree. I would be very interested to know. I don't think the bezel is from a GP yachting - the watch essentially looks identical to the Seamaster Yachting 176.010 to me, just with a different colour dial?

    And it looks identical to the one previously on sale in Watchuseek as mentioned above.

    The advert from Casowatches can be found here:
    http://www.casowatches.com/store/cm...92&LANGUAGE=2&CATALOG_ID=1&LEVEL=0&STORE_ID=1

    Would be grateful for anyone's thoughts on whether it's Franken - and ultimately roughly what it is worth.

    <this post will self-delete in 10 seconds...>
     
    1.jpg 5.jpg 6.jpg