Omega Seamaster 300 165.024 Restoration

G99's acquisition of a third Omega Seamaster 300 reference 165.024 from 1964 sparks a lively debate among collectors on the merits of restoration versus preserving original vintage condition. His detailed account of the watch's state upon arrival and his plans for its rejuvenation offer a valuable case study for anyone considering similar work on a classic dive watch. This post highlights the enduring appeal of the SM300 and the passionate discussions it continues to inspire within the collecting community.

my 3rd sm300 from 1964 and 2nd 165.024 arrived this morning in the post from darkest peru. i did mention it in passing a week or so ago and put some of the sellers pics up. its not really my aim to own every SM300 from 1964, honest guv.

i bought this from my usual auctionsite mainly because it was cheap, very cheap and original condition (read:tatty). as is usual it is not as bad in the flesh as it looks on the pics. the case is good apart from a few little dings, the bezel is a bit rough as are the hands. just normal wear and tear, but the more worn end of the scale.

the dial is far better than i imagined. the pics looked like it was dirty, but in fact its the opposite, the black marks are where the lume/paint has been removed. there are several dial versions for this model as many of you know, most have Lume on but some are flat white painted. these i believe are dials that have not had the lume put over the top as underneath all the lumed dials i've seen there has been white paint on the hour markers underneath the lume. this one is interesting as there is evidence of the paint being scraped off the hour markers with a brassy metallic look to the scrape marks. why this has been done i have no idea, perhaps it was to get rid of any radioactive materials. the good news is that the dial is not dirty and therefore the dirt hasnt got into the movement. 

the movement is better than expected, running a bit fast, but not as tarnished as it looked. a service should soon sort it out.

the glass is only lightly scratched so wont need replacing. a polish should bring up to standard again.

here are some quick pics i've just taken.

i did ask opinions on what i should do to this watch as i already have a great condition 165.024 and 165.014. they are original and never likely to go anywhere near water so i dont really want another that needs careful wear. some of you said, change parts and make it like new and others said service it and leave it original. what else did i expect

my watchmaker has already found that parts are available so i think i'm going to replace the dial, hands, bezel and crown. have the movement serviced and case buffed. then have it pressure tested so it is fit for its original purpose. the only down side is that the stick hands are no longer available so i will have to go with the wide dagger hour hand.

i could have the dial relumed and hands cleaned up, but if its not a perfect job it looks awful and i think i'd rather have new factory lumed pieces.

i'm sure some of you will disagree with this decision, but i'll be keeping all original parts to go with it and it would be nice to be able to wear a vintage piece knowing it wont let water in. it will be a bit like a Watchco model, but better. 

even with all this work done to it it will still only have cost me about 70% of my other 165.024 so it wont be overspending to make it right.

for now that is the end of my search for interesting pieces from 1964. i would like a handwind piece, perhaps a Seamaster 600 or 30 (or both), but that can wait as i've committed myself to 2 very unusual new pieces next month. in reality the search is never over, but i wont be actively ferreting around the websites.

i hope you enjoy the 'before' pics and over the last year have enjoyed my search for these very desirable pieces.

Graham