This watch belonged to my father. I suppose it's from 1960, but may be wrong. I went to change the battery and Iwas told that this was the first automatic from Omega. Can it be true?

 

It's not the first Automatic Watch of Omega, as this would be a Ref.2374. Looks like one of the first Seamaster from 1949. If you can show us a picture of the inside of the Caseback we can tell you more.
A Ref.2374 would look like this.

 

Not a Seamaster. Omega made a lot of watches without a model name, back in the day.

Tom

 

Why not a Semaster?

 

Hello, and welcome to the forum. All of the information you need to identify your watch is located on the inside. Ask your watchmaker to remove the caseback; take well-lit, focused pictures of the mechanical movement and inside caseback; and then post them here for more information along with a few sharper (in focus) pictures of that dial. We can tell you more about your watch then.

 

Its ruddy bloody beautiful, that's what it is.

Hold on to it man, pass it on through the generations.

 

I am finding that crown quite cool as well...would that be the original??

 

Can you provide a more clear photo of the dial?

If the hands and dial are correct, this is a very early Seamaster. Probably 1948 or so.

I don’t think the crown is original - would have been on a Connie. The crown may have a bit of value for that reason, and the correct ones are easier to find.

 

Very nice. It's a 36.5mm jumbo version of the more common Seamasters of that era.

The reference is called 2657/2494 and if you look it up you'll find that it is part of the Seamaster line, even though it lacks the logo on the dial.

The hands are replacements, but other than that I cannot say anything about authenticity - at a guess I would say that the dial has been repainted, though better pictures would help.

 

How do you know the hands aren’t original? I haven’t seen many, but given the 1948 re-edition from last year, didn’t they produce early Seamasters with these hands?

This image comes to mind:

 

There seems to be a discrepancy between numerals pink gold and hands yellow gold, but it may be the picture. More and better pictures needed.

 

I don't like the look of it and do not recall seeing this reference with leaf hands before.

 

Do you think it's a 2577?

 

No. As I wrote earlier it's a 2657/2494.

 

Is this overview in some way I cannot see connected to reference numbers?

 

Yes, those references you mentioned bore cal. 342, 351, 354, and hands for those references you can see above (according to BESTFIT). There are leaf hands among them.

 

Yes, I can see that - but that doesn't mean that they are appropriate for all references.

Constellations came with cal. 354 too, would you use the chart to prove that leaf hands are correct for those as well?

Edit: I should probably soften my earlier comment somewhat; that I haven't seen a 2657 with leaf hands before are naturally not a clear sign that these are incorrect. My gut says they are, but I wouldn't mind being proven wrong

 

I have some early bumpers (not 2657) with leaf hands.

But my early Seamaster has dauphine hands.