Does anyone know what the difference is between the non date Seamaster reference 165.001 and a 165.002?

They both have caliber 552 and look identical in every way and came out in both stainless steel and GP.. Would the dials and crystals interchange? I know that one of them has dial measuring 29.2mm or 29.5mm, but cannot remember which model was which. There is obviously a subtle difference between the 2 models. Any comments are highly appreciated, thanks!,

 

The hands, I believe.

 

I’m not so sure that the difference is the hands.

My JD 002 has the same hands and hour markers as a 001 (when compared to catalogues from 63/64).

 

Let me preface by saying that I'm no expert on the reference.

Just be wary of catalogue images. They are a great reference but they come from a time when there was no digital photography or other tools to make laying out and publishing a catalogue simple and straightforward. Often, images may be design prototypes; sketches; or, simply, watches from the previous year. Treat the catalogues as a good guide but with a little skepticism.

 

the 165.001 was made of solid gold. the 165.002 was plated

 

This is not correct - both cases are available in a number of materials, both solid gold, steel, gold capped, and plated.

 

depends on the letters

ST 165.001. stainless steel (rather rare)
BA 165.001 18k gold
JD 165.002 40 microns gold plated

may be there are some other references, I'm only mentionning what I have in my archives. There are several other refereces with some extension 165.0023
165.0022
165.0026
165.0024
165.0026
165.0010
165.0013
165.0014

Some of them are pure divers.

vanitas vanitatum...

 

Yes, I know it depends on the letters. But once again you are confusing things. The OP is asking about 165001 and 165002. This means under the new numbering system he's asking about 1650001 and 1650002, not the list of other numbers you have listed. 1650010 is not the same as 1650001.

 

I have three 165.002's. Looking at images on the interweb of the 165.001. I think the difference may be in the shape of the caseback. This is kind of a guess/observation.

 

The 165.001 appears to have flat case sides, where the 165.002 has a little step. almost like a band or racing stripe around the case. I haven't held a 165.001, only the 165.002 in stainless.

 

Does anyone know if the reference 165.001 was 39mm in diameter??? Any pictures of original dials?? Thank you

 

No, more like 34-35mm, 39 lug tip to lug tip.

 

1650001 - 34.3 mm

 

Here’s one https://omegaforums.net/threads/omega-seamaster-st-165-001.10937/

 

Cases?... 1st one is a 165001. Second one a 165002

 

Ugh!! 1st one 165.001? You on the wine already?

 

Haha. Ok. Let me go back to my database. Maybe I took a wrong picture out of it. I once owned a couple of 165001's...

 

Sorry. I think a picture of a 166010 ended up in my 165001 file...

 

I think I may have bought one of these on eBay, and I believe I've found another difference.

165.001 - Integrated Bezel / No Bezel
165.002 - Separate Bezel

 

Are the diameters different?