Hey all,

I'm looking at getting into the watch game in the form of a vintage Omega Seamaster, but my lack of knowledge makes me slightly hesitant. I've read up on how to look out for replicas, values, etc, but I would really appreciate someone with a little more experience taking a look if possible.

The watch I'm looking at is listed as a vintage Omega Seamaster cosmic transition. It appears to be in good shape, however the seller doesn't know the maintenance history. The seller doesn't know the +/- on seconds, only that it works "well". Visually it appears to be in decent shape.





Is ~$300 a fair price for a piece like this? Is there anything I should be weary of on this model?

Thanks in advance!

 

The fact that the seller doesn't know the service history of a vintage watch, is totally immaterial. Frankly, it's also the least of the issues with this watch. Please read this https://omegaforums.net/threads/learn-how-to-fish.52603/ Educate yourself. Of course, since the watch has sold, I can only assume you purchased it.

 

I have not purchased it.

 

Someone apparently did so it looks like you dodged a bullet.

 

Run away quickly on this one.

 

Can you shed a little bit of light on what I don't see? I'd love to be able to look for specific things in the future.

 

I'm pretty sure it's a redial and the case has been polished to death. Read the link; you'll learn what to look for.

 

I've been reading through the stickies and figured it had been polished, but the redial is hard for me to spot. The redial would be more of a concern than the copious amounts of polishing, correct? The polishing impacts the overall look, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's been neglected?

 

Your best bet is to hang around here. Read, Learn, and watch the for sale forums here. Welcome to the vintage world we love all brands here, and even Omegas that do not have Speed in the name.

 

I prefer Speed but it might explain my crankiness.

 

Google images is your friend....and a good optometrist after your eyestrain kicks in.

 

Sounds like it's in my best interest to walk away from this one and continue my research... or just buy a Speedmaster

 

A lot of the learning process rests in repetition and experience.
Spotting redials becomes easier the more you see. You learn to recognize the good ones and are alerted to ones that aren't "quite right'.
Look for conformity to known correct examples, look for consistency of fonts and indices, look for hand length and signs the markers have been moved/replaced, look for consistency of age throughout the piece.
Most of all, look for advice from experts you trust.
Then, you buy.

Speedy's are the quirkiest of all. Big $ equals big thieves.
I'm years away from understanding that world.

 

Besides the points mentioned, these watches require an Omega proficient watchmaker to be able to open the tuna can case, service the movement and re-seal the case using the correct seals. The case will also need a new seal to enable it to be fitted correctly into the outer case.

A lot of additional expense even if the correct seals are still available from Omega.

About the only good thing with these is that due to the difficulty opening the case, tinkerers haven't been in there doing stuff to the movement, but the downside is that it's rare to see movement shots of these.

Move on, there are better ones around.

 

Here are some tells to assist you with what's wrong here.
1. The hands are too short for the dial. Minute and seconds hands normally align with the minute track (= the minute markers on the dial).
2. The minute markers vary greatly and some aren't straight.
3. "Swiss Made" is normally below the minute track. Here it's above it.
4. The S in "Seamaster" is of a style that went out around 1962. This watch is clearly later.
5. The I in "Automatic" is too close to the C.
6. The back is just - horrible. I can't put it any better than that.
7. The black of the dial looks too matt. There is no "surface" to it.
8. "Cosmic transition" is a new one on me. It sounds more like an astronomical term than the name of a watch and smells of bafflling with bullshit.

 

4. The S in "Seamaster" is of a style that went out around 1962. This watch is clearly later.
.[/QUOTE]
Hey, Edward! I had given up trying to find out when the coat hanger S was replaced, so it was a happy revelation to see you pegging it at 1962. What came next? More of a round S then? If I had more knowledge, I'd make a Seamaster Script Thru the Years visual guide!

 

Hey, Edward! I had given up trying to find out when the coat hanger S was replaced, so it was a happy revelation to see you pegging it at 1962. What came next? More of a round S then? If I had more knowledge, I'd make a Seamaster Script Thru the Years visual guide![/QUOTE]


That's in the Forum somewhere or out on the www. I bet someone has the link saved.

 

That's in the Forum somewhere or out on the www. I bet someone has the link saved.[/QUOTE]
I looked and looked and couldn't find anything!

 

Might be a victim of the photo hosting site which shall remain nameless.

 

This 1 was original a Seamaster Cosmic 2000 ref 166.0130. Redialed for sure, plus wrong hands, overpolished, plus plus plus ...