Seamaster 300m buying guide

[Motman]

Hi
Is there any info/buying guide on the seamaster 300 watches? I’m thinking of buying a used one to save suffering the new watch depreciation and wonder if there’s any models to avoid. I prefer the sword hands compared to the skeleton hands and I’d like an auto. I’ve read somewhere that the 2500D movement is the one to go for but how can you tell which movement it has inside? Are they fitted from a certain date of manufacture? Are there any limited edition ones? What about titanium ones? Any advice would be helpful. Thanks.

[Padders]

The problem here is that Omega have had many different ranges of watches that look superficially like 'Seamaster 300' some dating back to the 1950s. You may get more of a response if you were to ask for help with 'Omega SMP' or 'Omega Bond/2254' as people will recognise that and may be more inclined to click in.

To answer some of your questions, the 2500 models were rolled out in about 2008. They simplified the range when they did this and removed the very popular sword hands 2254 and 2255 designs and AFAIK there are no titanium models with the 2500 movement either. Thus, you wont find a sword hands model with the 2500 movement. They did introduce a black dial version of the blue Bond design though.

That aside It wasn't necessarily all good news post 2008 since the case depth was increased slightly, up from the ~11mm of the 1120 models to the ~12mm of the 2500s. Early 2500s weren't always totally reliable either, you are right to hope for a 2500D but they weren't around until about 2012 or so at the earliest. There are indeed several limited editions, including solid gold bezel versions and others but nowhere near as many as with the Speedmaster thankfully.

As you may be able to guess from my tone, I am more a fan of the earlier 1993-2008 1120 varieties, I have owned I think about 9 of them. Here are a few, most now moved on:

[PickleB]

First off, as far as I know, apart from the chronographs all the sword hand models used the c1120. You'll be able to find out more if you have a look at these links: Seamaster 300M models and Seamaster FAQ.

Thereafter, if you find a model / reference number, you can put it into Omega vintage watches or (for later watches) the Omega watch finder. You can also search these on various terms, eg case material, by selecting filters on the side bar.

Then, Google "Omega Seamaster history" and see what you can find.

[Mark lowman]

Sounds like you’d like a 2254.50. Just make sure the Bezel is in good nick as they are expensive to replace

[MartynJC (UK)]

To throw a curveball in are you interested in the SM300 thoughI think you actually meant the Seamaster Professional with the HEV ?

http://chronomaddox.com/seamaster_3oo_a_history.html

goodness it’s been 10years since Chuck passed away - his legacy lives on. Worth a celebration?

Martyn

[Padders]

To throw a curveball in are you interested in the SM300 thoughI think you actually meant the Seamaster Professional with the HEV ?

http://chronomaddox.com/seamaster_3oo_a_history.html

goodness it’s been 10years since Chuck passed away - his legacy lives on. Worth a celebration?

Martyn

That article, though hosted on Chronomaddox was actually written back in 2001 by Bill Sohne who is still a current active participant on Omegaforums and a very approachable bloke. I had inferred from the OP mentioning skeleton hands and the 2500 movement that he was referring to the SMP rather than the SM300 or SM300 MC. Omega don't make it easy though!

[walkerwek1958]

I agree with Padders, I prefer the 1120-powered pre-2008 movements but out of the Bond versions I prefer the 2008 'Black Bond'...shame it's got the co-axial movement which I don`t like. By the time the co-axial was fitted to the SMP the 2500C was current; I`m fairly certain the 2500D never made it into the SMP till the ceramic models came out although I can`t be 100% sure.

Padders is right about the slight increase in thickness; in 2008 the caseback was altered to a slightly thicker design, the difference is slight (less than 1mm) but it's a step in the wrong direction for me. Can`t understand why they did this because the movement appears to be the same depth as the 1120!

Here's a fairly rare bimetal variant I own, circa 2003. Can`t remember the model number. I have both blue and black dials for it too!

[Motman]

Many thanks chaps - plenty of useful information here.

[Matt68]

I agree with Padders, I prefer the 1120-powered pre-2008 movements but out of the Bond versions I prefer the 2008 'Black Bond'...shame it's got the co-axial movement which I don`t like. By the time the co-axial was fitted to the SMP the 2500C was current; I`m fairly certain the 2500D never made it into the SMP till the ceramic models came out although I can`t be 100% sure.

Padders is right about the slight increase in thickness; in 2008 the caseback was altered to a slightly thicker design, the difference is slight (less than 1mm) but it's a step in the wrong direction for me. Can`t understand why they did this because the movement appears to be the same depth as the 1120!

Here's a fairly rare bimetal variant I own, circa 2003. Can`t remember the model number. I have both blue and black dials for it too!

I prefer the extra thickness off my SMPc compared to my old 1120cal 2255.80 Paul

Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app

[walkerwek1958]

Disagree, thicker is never better IMO. Much prefer slim watches although current fashion has gone on the opposite direction.

Paul

[Omegamanic]

I prefer the extra thickness off my SMPc compared to my old 1120cal 2255.80 Paul

Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app

To be fair there is very little in it. It's not as if we are talking about the difference between a 2500 and 8500 Planet Ocean ;)

[Matt68]

To be fair there is very little in it. It's not as if we are talking about the difference between a 2500 and 8500 Planet Ocean ;)

True, but I found it noticeable as the 1120 wore a bit slim

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk

[Padders]

One of the things which I suspect held the GMT SMPs back from being a bigger seller is the fact that to add in the GMT complication necessitated adding about 2mm to the overall case depth leading to design changes which can look clumsy (crown shrouds, thicker bezel for example) and made for a less balanced watch. They got it right with the original case IMO.

[thenikjones]

One of the things which I suspect held the GMT SMPs back from being a bigger seller is the fact that to add in the GMT complication necessitated adding about 2mm to the overall case depth leading to design changes which can look clumsy (crown shrouds, thicker bezel for example) and made for a less balanced watch. They got it right with the original case IMO.

I love mine but there is something about it that niggles. Maybe the thicker bezel? I like the incredibly well shrouded crown though.

That said, NOT having the He crown made for a far better watch.