Since there were a lot more 2271s which were not Teddington's, without an archive from Omega or some real provenance to support the claim, I wouldn't pay a premium over a typical 2271 in similar condition. BTW, there were likely dozens of dials offered on the 2271.
More large clear photos might help especially the movement and dial.
I could see from that one picture people of moderate to above average experience calling it both ways. There are aspects that lead me to believe it’s authentic and a few things that I would want to clear up.
the picture is not helping. Need a straight on shot.
If I may ask, what makes you doubt?
The hash marks look quite evenly spaced to me.
1952: This movement would match the dial... but the case seems to be earlier.
Maybe the movement was swapped?
Actually AFAIK the 2271 is the standard for a Teddington, they were produced from the early 40's onwards, I've seen some watches with that ref from the end of the 40's. It doesn't seem weird to me that a watch from 1952 has it after all.
I am not sure if you understood my statement correctly... a -2 version of the case should be early 40ies when they started to build the 2271 while movement and dial are from around 1952 about ten years later
It looks very similar in many ways... The watch is probably legit and it's a dealer in my town who owns a phisical shop, I guess I'm going to go for it and if something wrong pops up I will complain in person.
