Help identifying vintage Seamaster Cosmic 2000

[zambo]

Can someone help me with identifying the basics about this watch - I don't have any other details on it apart from the pics. It has a flat round back (as depicted in pic) and I have noticed on other Cosmic's that they have the flat rectangular indent on the back. I note this one has no seamonster marking either on the reverse, so I am in the dark a bit - any help much appreciated. Visited the Omega archive and didn't get too much illumination (that's probably my inexperience) - so I think I need expert "hands on" advice rather than the archive on this one.

Thanks

Richard

[eptaz]

Welcome to WUS, Richard. Nice Cosmic!

I'm not sure what details you're looking for, but I can try to provide a few. This appears to ba a nice Seamaster Cosmic from the early to mid-70s. I belive this is a later model, so it's probably powered by a c.1010 movement (earlier day-date versions used the c.752), but you'll have to take it to a watchmaker to find out for certain. It uses a unishell case, which opens from the dial side.

Hope that helps a bit.

eric

[zambo]

Thank you Eric - I will have it in my hands in the next few days and will whip it off to an old European watchmaker I know and have him run his eye (or should that be lupe!) over it. Appreciate your information and the welcome to the forum.

Regards

Richard :-!

[georges zaslavsky]

cal 1020 because it is a day date 1010 was only date, it is a 28800bph movement fro mthe mid 70's, very accurate when properly regulated.

[eptaz]

cal 1020 because it is a day date 1010 was only date, it is a 28800bph movement fro mthe mid 70's, very accurate when properly regulated.
You are correct, Georges. Thanks for the clarification.

eric

[zambo]

Received the watch today and in better condition than I thought. Dropped it down to my watchmaker immediately - should have taken some pics first (will follow up with them soon)

Anyway, the inside of the case back is 166133 which the Omega database says should be 166.0133 (I am hoping this means much the same thing). The movement number is 35479112 - this makes it a '72 edition - movement is a 1022 and keeps time it appears, but I am getting it cleaned and lubricated, a new crystal and have it checked for accuracy anyway.

The dial was very nice but had a crackled finish - by that I mean it was like it is crazed except there were no gaps in the colour on the face (which is dark blue) - it is nice and shiny and appears to be like the intended finish. Did Omega ever do such a watch dial finish?

If it was refinished in the past you couldn't/wouldn't have gone over the crazing the way it is - it would have been too much work and served no purpose (you would have just done the dial up properly) - any advice on that appreciated.

Other than than, it looks like a sweet little watch. My wife who is a jeweller is going to polish the s/s case so just waiting on the availability of the crystal.

Thanks for the advice to date.

Richard

[eptaz]

Received the watch today and in better condition than I thought. Dropped it down to my watchmaker immediately - should have taken some pics first (will follow up with them soon)Excellent! It's always a nice surprise when they show up looking better than expected.
Anyway, the inside of the case back is 166133 which the Omega database says should be 166.0133 (I am hoping this means much the same thing).It does.
The movement number is 35479112 - this makes it a '72 edition -Or, right around there, according to Omega's chart. Remember, they describe these as "earliest production years."
movement is a 1022 and keeps time it appears, but I am getting it cleaned and lubricated, a new crystal and have it checked for accuracy anyway.That's always a smart choice, when you don't know the service history.
The dial was very nice but had a crackled finish - by that I mean it was like it is crazed except there were no gaps in the colour on the face (which is dark blue) - it is nice and shiny and appears to be like the intended finish. Did Omega ever do such a watch dial finish?
They produced Cosmics with brushed finishes, sunburst patterns, and many different looks. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if they gave some dials a "crackle" finish.
If it was refinished in the past you couldn't/wouldn't have gone over the crazing the way it is - it would have been too much work and served no purpose (you would have just done the dial up properly) - any advice on that appreciated.
Well, you might be surprised by some of the redials out there and the amount of time and trouble some go to. This redial was pointed out to me the other day:
http://i20.ebayimg.com/03/i/08/1a/48/34_1.JPG

That's not a simple dial to reproduce and they could have decided on a simpler pattern, but someone decided to go the extra mile. They didn't quite get it right, but it was a heck of an effort.

That being said, I don't think yours has been repainted. It just looks too nice.
Other than than, it looks like a sweet little watch. My wife who is a jeweller is going to polish the s/s case so just waiting on the availability of the crystal.

Thanks for the advice to date.

Richard
It sounds like you got yourself a winner, Richard. Please keep us updated and be sure to share some picks, upon its return!

eric

[georges zaslavsky]

Very few people know how to redial perfectly watches.That is why generally it is preferrable to favor very good condition watches.

[zambo]

Thanks George - good advice.