Verifying authenticity or model of potential new watch.

Posts
37
Likes
30
Well they seem to be rather reluctant to give me the serial number. That explains the bad quality movement pics. Standy was completely right and you guys have really helped alot!

I guess the search will continue now.
 
Posts
37
Likes
30
R rod442
Yes, Keep looking. I bought one on the bay for a steal at 1900 early this month.
I wouldn't pay over 3K for one and would keep looking for one that's in the 2500 range.
Mine did have similar case back markings inside, but the missing planet ocean and 600m wr etchings would have me wondering.


Awesome! Im glad you got a good deal!

Was it in good condition? Why do you think the seller let it go for that low? Also ive noticed the 2210.51 are drying up. Can only find very few for sale now.
 
Posts
37
Likes
30
Yes, completely normal for this movement. The caliber is not on the rotor.



The case back should have engravings - both versions of the case used on this model had engravings on the case back, so if they are not there, they have been removed. BTW this is the first version of the case.

Please ask the seller to send you the full serial number, and post it here - I'll double check it to be sure this isn't some kind of franken. The fact that he sent you such good photos of the watch, but then a crappy photo of the movement, makes me feel uneasy.


Hey Archer how can you tell which version case it is? Ive been shopping around for other PO’s of this reference and would like to be able to ID the older and new ones.

Thank you
 
Posts
7,074
Likes
13,178
When in doubt it is always best to pass unless a dodgy or Frankenwatch doesn't bother you. Too many question marks on this watch, it would scare me off.
 
Posts
28,010
Likes
71,472
Hey Archer how can you tell which version case it is? Ive been shopping around for other PO’s of this reference and would like to be able to ID the older and new ones.

Thank you

By looking at the case number inside the case back - photo was posted that shows it.
 
Posts
2
Likes
0
Awesome! Im glad you got a good deal!

Was it in good condition? Why do you think the seller let it go for that low? Also ive noticed the 2210.51 are drying up. Can only find very few for sale now.


It was in surprisingly good condition. I think I just got very lucky because it was an auction that ended on a Tuesday at about noon. So probably it would have done better ending on a weekend. Also, being on a leather strap might have hurt it a little, and it didn't have many pictures, plus the description just said Omega P.O. xl.

I just threw the next bid at it, not expecting it to win.... and it did. I would have preferred an orange bezel PO, but being a chrono made it ok too.
Edited:
 
Posts
17,761
Likes
26,940
By looking at the case number inside the case back - photo was posted that shows it.
?? But the caseback has no engraving when it should right?
 
Posts
28,010
Likes
71,472
?? But the caseback has no engraving when it should right?

Sorry, I don't know what you are questioning...
 
Posts
17,761
Likes
26,940
Sorry, I don't know what you are questioning...
I thought you said all versions of the 3313 POC should have engravings on the back of the watch. While the part number on the inside denotes its an early case version. I know that at least on the 2500 PO the early ones appear to not have the Planet Ocean engravings on the back just the Seamonster as I have run into a bunch that do not have it. If I misinterpreted your earlier comments stating
"The case back should have engravings - both versions of the case used on this model had engravings on the case back,so if they are not there, they have been removed. BTW this is the first version of the case."

Unless you think it has been removed, as I'm not sure why they would have been removed.
 
Posts
28,010
Likes
71,472
I thought you said all versions of the 3313 POC should have engravings on the back of the watch.

Yes - already said that.

While the part number on the inside denotes its an early case version.

Yes - already said that.

Unless you think it has been removed

Yes - already said that.

There is a pattern here...😀