Vintage Seamaster help

Posts
27
Likes
5
Hi guys,
Does this seem legit to you? Do you see anything wrong with it?
Also, for my knowledge, why the Seamaster text is in different format from other vintage models i've seen around?
thanks 馃榾
 
Posts
81
Likes
97
IMO redial. Omega automatic and swiss made look really wrong. Replacement crown. And the case looks a bit rough to me.
 
Posts
1,088
Likes
6,994
The hangar-S is right. But in some ways, it's academic. The case is way over-polished and very soft. I would wait for a sharper example to come along.
 
Posts
23,528
Likes
52,311
What's with the weird shortened seconds hand?

The sweep hand is about the right length IMO (see 4th photo), but it is missing the tail.
 
Posts
4,991
Likes
18,535
Is that a 28xx serial? If so, the coathanger 's would be wrong.
 
Posts
5,636
Likes
5,803
Comparing this to my 166.010, which is perhaps what it is, the dial is right, hour and minute are right, seconds hand has no tail. Movement looks fine. Crown is an acceptable substitute.

The lug edges are a little soft but hard to tell with the light. The bezel is untouched. If the price was right, I'd buy it and have my watchmaker refinish the sides of the case, which would serve to sharpen those lug edges again. Not every watchmaker has that ability. Factory service would end up that way too.

I'd pay as much as perhaps $800. I paid less for mine but there was more wrong with it.
 
Posts
986
Likes
3,009
the coathanger

tenor.gif
 
Posts
5,636
Likes
5,803
That's what these guys are calling that long, stylized S at the beginning of "Seamaster". Somewhat later it was changed to a more usual shape.
 
Posts
5,636
Likes
5,803
The lug edges are a little soft but hard to tell with the light.
I correct myself. This case is like mine where the sides are curved and what looks like an obliteration of the sharp edge is just the lighting and the photography. You can see the sharp lug edges when you make the picture larger.