So...is this SM 300 a re-dial or is it original Omega parts?

[swedeone3]

I am still confused. I have sent a message to Omega seeking their input but would love to hear others' here. I am being told by a few that this is indeed a rare genuine Omega dial, while others are casting it as a bad "re-dial".

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v194/swedeone/9f905c8e.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

Thank you in advance for chiming in.

[Crusader]

I am still confused. I have sent a message to Omega seeking their input but would love to hear others' here. I am being told by a few that this is indeed a rare genuine Omega dial, while others are casting it as a bad "re-dial".

Sorry to hear about your doubts, Todd, but I must say that is another reason why some would favor the Precista ...

[Si]

I haven't seen that particular font before (see the word Seamaster). Also, the indices seem to extend right out whereas all the others I have seen have a space at the edge where it can be seen if there are stubbies present or not.

I also think there is something not right about the bevelled adge of the case, esp near the crown.

Could be wrong though.

[Watch Dilettante]

I've never seen that font used for "Seamaster 3oo" before either. And I've never seen a genuine SM300 dial of that era with a 6 and 9 that are fully "connected" as on yours. But there are more variations of genuine SM300's than you can shake a stick at. Over on MWR, it seems that as soon as somebody declares something a fake, somebody else turns up a vintage Omega ad showing the same variation.

I'd say be patient and let Omega be the final judge on this. But I think Omega Bienne will want to see the watch in person before rendering anything approaching a definitive judgement.

BTW, that looks to be a Naiad crown you've got. Sorry to say, those were not all that good even when they first came out. The theory was that the greater the pressure, the more the crown sealed. The reality was, that the less pressure there was, the more the damn things leaked. Even Omega itself pretty much admitted this, and the later, larger domed screw crown was the answer to the problem...

Good luck with your quest for answers -- be sure to let us know what happens!

[KCampbell]

When a problem comes along
You must flip it
Before the cream sits out too long
You must flip it
When something's going wrong
You must flip it

now flip it
into shape
shape it up
get straight
go forward
move ahead
try to detect it
it's not too late
to flip it
flip it good

When a good time turns around
You must flip it
You will never live it down
Unless you flip it
No one gets their way
Until they flip it

I say flip it
flip it good

Sorry, just couldn't resist that Devo beat.

Kevin

[Watch Dilettante]

Suddenly, I seem to have the urge to wear a large clay flowerpot upside down on my head...

[swedeone3]

This watch will NOT be flipped. The dial may be for another, butthe watch will stay in my posession. Period.

[David Wrubel]

No question it is a redial.

The font is incorrect, both the "Omega Automatic" at the top of the dial and the "Seamaster 300" script at the bottom. The real giveaway, though, is that the loops in the "6" and "9" are closed, a sure sign of a redial. On an orginal, the loops are open, as in this photo of an original dial...same watch on strap and bracelet.

<img src="http://www.fototime.com/599160E1AC17AF1/orig.jpg" border=0 alt="Hosting provided by FotoTime">

<img src="http://www.fototime.com/644259F0EE06A36/orig.jpg" border=0 alt="Hosting provided by FotoTime">

[Tinker]

How did this watch go from "Holy Grail" on 1 September to "Re-dial" on 2 September?

[Omega Blogger]

>the watch will stay in my posession. Period.

The WIS equivalent of Doug Ellis expressing confidence in the Manager

[swedeone3]

The dial on my watch was stated by the seller to be genuine Omega parts however, I have come to find out that it may very well be a re-dial. I have decided to have a genuine dial installed. Once that is completed, my watch will indeed be my "Holy Grail".

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v194/swedeone/ome0822.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

Cheers,
Todd

[Orbit64]

what do the seller has to say?

[Gunscrossed]

I am still confused. I have sent a message to Omega seeking their input but would love to hear others' here. I am being told by a few that this is indeed a rare genuine Omega dial, while others are casting it as a bad "re-dial".

<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v194/swedeone/9f905c8e.jpg" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">

Thank you in advance for chiming in.

Is it me or does the case look strange? look at the area where the lugs meet the band, shouldn't the case curve inwards?

Peter

[swanbourne]

I think this thread (and others) demonstrates how difficult it is to know what is genuine and original with this model and what is not. It isn't helped by the fact that there exists at least 3 different original dial designs for the SM300.

What with new old stock parts being married with original parts, and sometimes even aftermarket parts, it's becoming a risky business to buy this model and be certain you're getting a 100% original example. This isn't the first time we've seen knowledgeable collectors taken in. I don't know what the answer is, it appears that due diligence doesn't always work.

Eddie

[Gunscrossed]

One of the reasons I'm happy with my rather tired version, it may look like a 40 year old watch that's because it is.
<IMG SRC="http://pic15.picturetrail.com/VOL629/2587563/7740316/107287638.jpg">