Dr No
[Moderator Omega - Wristscan]
34939
It looks authentic to my eyes. Not all crosshairs . . .
. . . were uninterrupted. I have a ref 166.0002 Seamaster with a similar pattern, sourced from the grandson of the original owner. Unfortunately, I can't share an image as there isn't one in my files; it's currently at my watchmaker's for seconds hand replacement.
The hands, though, might well be Omega replacements. The minute hand in particular looks a little longer than it should. Interestingly enough, there are multiple sizes of hands available for these movements that are fractions of a millimeter apart. The seconds hand of my 166.0002 was replaced but turned out to be the wrong length, so my watchmaker is trying to find one that's correct.
Art
More posts:
Legit 60s Seamaster?
Dear all I could use a little help with identifying whether the following piece looks legit: Advertised as a 1966 Seamaster, calibre 562, solid yellow gold, reference number 230 26 230. The ref number does not show up on the Omega vintage database. The Se...
General rule ...
To determine if a watch is "real", we need: - Picture of the movement - Picture of the inside of the case back - Macro shots of the dial and hands Otherwise, it will be a wild guess. Cheers, Nilo
It looks authentic to my eyes. Not all crosshairs . . .
. . . were uninterrupted. I have a ref 166.0002 Seamaster with a similar pattern, sourced from the grandson of the original owner. Unfortunately, I can't share an image as there isn't one in my files; it's currently at my watchmaker's for seconds hand rep...
Some more info and pics
Dear all Thanks so far for your opinions! Dr. No, the information about the broken crosshairs would be reassuring, I also found other 166.001s with broken crosshairs: I today got 2 more pics from the seller, one from the caseback (although a pretty bad p...
The correct reference would be BA 166.0001 . . .
. . . and while it was introduced in 1962 (according to Omega's own reference site), it might well have continued in production until 1966 or later, so there's no real issue at stake. It looks ok to me, excepting the proviso regarding hour and (especially...
I guess it boils down to the hands question...
as the BA 166.0001 entry in the Omega database states the following for the dial: Dial Metal, with metal "stick" hands and hand-rivetted gold hour markers. No picture of the dial though. Does that information mean that BA 166.0001 were *always* produced w...
I can't say for sure about the style of hands . . .
. . . but it's a fair bet that stick hands would've been employed throughout the production run. Otto Frei still has gold-finished hands for the cal 562, so it's worth a try checking their website. As for pricing discussion on the forum regarding a partic...
