Reference Points: The Omega Seamaster 300

[@jeanlefranc3817]

The Hodinkee’s spirit is alive. Shots of shoes and ankles right in the middle of the screen.

[@BB-gl7zt]

The 2254 is like Rich's socks. Missing from this video.

[@damiengibbs6600]

Really enjoyed this but you missed out the 2254 that ran alongside the Bond watch. Milsoec dial and sword hands. An underrated watch that probably got overlooked whilst in the shadow of its more popular Bond variant but has slowly gathered a following in recent times.

[@MattDapson]

Thanks so much for doing this. Getting back into watches after paring down my collection four years ago. I picked up the summer series model about two weeks ago. Initially, I was going to get the 1957 heritage version, as my interest in the watch included a desire to get something new that paid homage to a design started in my birth year. Your remarkable accounting of what’s transpired with the watch was exactly what I was looking for and it just popped up! Great work and thank you again.

[@zimankhan7411]

Another edition to the best series.

[@sonnyvarioni1654]

addition?

[@baustard]

james is a great addition to talking points. Elevates the discussion from being merely reference numbers and dial variations

[@robynsjp]

Really ? The "164.024" reference does not even exist. It is 165.024. And their "experts" do not even notice. Ever heard of a Porsche 811 ?

[@blairdrummond5043]

I was looking up Omega Seamaster Reference Points a few days and was disappointed to see there wasn't one yet. Great timing!

[@Joe-xo3xy]

Guys, this made my evening. I will keep watching this to get better educated about Omega as a brand and their ethos when it comes to product development. The current model lines demonstrate Omega's principles for innovation and technology. This was great work.

[@KingKarimYT]

I was looking to purchase a 2254.50 and then Hodinkee made a Seamaster video without the reference lol.

[@JamesIdentity]

That lapis blue dial is Killer!!

[@pzett]

What a pity that you have not covered the beautiful Seamaster 2254.50 😞

[@miabeatz80]

Awesome history lesson and perspective. I love seeing reviews of the Seamaster that don't compare it to other brands (cough). There's so much deep history and craftsmanship in the lineage. Makes you love the evolution and look forward to future iterations even more 👏

[@ChrisVPlant]

Excellent excellent video guys, great to see all the editors together chatting over these incredible pieces. Agree with James, Omega needs to bring back the sword hands. Steel sword hand Seamaster with tapered bracelet and you have a record breaking bestseller 🔥

[@HHIto]

I'm a "veteran" (>50 years) of Rolex, Omega, and JLC, ... I'm "guessing" that the "weight" of the lume and metal puts stress on the hand(s), which (possibly) breaks off after 50 years. I've got a bunch of old watches with broken hands (Longines, Omega...not Rolex). I briefly worked for Omega..." they" wouldn't answer my "trivial" question, but I believe it's the reason Omega hasn't budged on a redesign back to the popular sword hands! Fellow Omegans, thoughts?

[@borage2000]

Difficult maybe, but a bigger version is used in the Ploprof so no excuse for Omega here…

[@RedWolfRedWolfRedWolf]

The best Seamaster imho is the 2254.50 it’s got that milspec look sword hands big lume and a superb movement. They have been increasing in price too. Also thin af. Great episode guys.

[@evh4611]

Yes

[@robynsjp]

2231.50 is better. I have the 2254.50 which is great, but 2231.50 is on my target list. 2232.80 is great too.

[@muskokaboats]

The Peter Blake was peak Omega

[@mmagbie1]

The man died defending his ship literally named Seamaster and Hodinkee still snubbed him.

[@nicolasv99]

Informative, casual, and with great watches on the table. Thanks!

[@masterwatch]

Omega's 1960s and 1970s is just full of fantastic designs. The Speedmaster Mark series in the 70s is just fantastic.

[@brockadcock2735]

I've always felt like James is the most down to earth person at Hodinkee. Maybe I'm biased because I agree with most everything he says.

[@PaoloZucchetti]

where is 2254.50??

[@YusssoM]

Really awesome video, deep dive(hehe) into omega dive watch history is really awesome, makes you appreciate the newer stuff even more. I'm not into collecting vintage watch, but i really love vintage design. So the 2021 models with that lollipop seconds hand and the broad arrow hour hand would be my dream watch!

[@harrison1056]

"...fixed spring bars..." * James smiles, grabs one on a grayish nato * (Ends video with a request for the return of the sword hands) - This video delivered everything I didn't know I wanted from a Reference Points

[@lukasleo5335]

Missing Eric wind here and the Peter Blake. Other than that it’s nice content.

[@m.halcyon5772]

The more you know about wrist-bound time pieces, the stranger your hair becomes. Fact.

[@troglodytestroglodytes220]

Then I clearly know nothing.

[@juniorjohnson5961]

And your Socks disappear 🧦

[@jonboy8181]

Haha, I came here to say something about the no socks! Someone beat me to it! 😂😂

[@joshuatvernon]

Until you become the @THEMADWATCHCOLLECTOR

[@jeanlefranc3817]

And the more you’re prone to put your shoes on display on Hodinkee’s vids. The king of the game being obviously Ben. I have to replay his recent interviews in podcast format not to be distracted by dirty shoe soles coming right in my face 😂.

[@markcovelli1811]

Great episode. I know the focus was on the 300. You did pivot for a moment to the Pro Plof and neglected "The Grand" - a very rare watch worth being part of the conversation. Cheers and keep up the great work

[@ac_later]

Thank you James! WE NEED MORE SWORD HANDS! Love my Seamaster 57 trilogy.

[@Thomgxx100]

Love my Steinhart Vintage Military - Sword Hands!

[@jpatel5573]

That last line, absolutely. SWORD HANDS

[@mmagbie1]

And yet no MOD dial big triangle sword hand Peter Blake models….

[@riveravictor]

Content is getting better

[@3082103]

The best watch video ever released this year

[@robynsjp]

Agree if they didn't get the references numbers wrong. 164.024 does not exist.

[@3082103]

@@robynsjp ahahahah true that! Should be 165.024 and 166.024

[@dantrelford3371]

Someone needs to do a reference points on socks in the Hodinkee office

[@brentwoods7450]

I dont think youll find any in the office

[@sonnyvarioni1654]

It's November, dudes, put some socks on.

[@AH-sn9sl]

Hodinkee has attracted all the snobs and wannabe exoerts as it’s audience. Thanks for the reminder!

[@algernonwolfwhistle6351]

No mention of the 2254? The best looking Seamaster of the modern era IMO.

[@mmagbie1]

Couldn’t agree more. An absolute miss on the 2254.50 and also the 2230.50 with the first applied logo/indices.

[@mackledee]

Love the vid. I know it's slightly outside the strict Omega Seamaster 300 scope, but I would have been interested to see some mention of the Watchco Seamaster 300s. And similar to the mention of the Seamaster Professional 300, I would have been interested to hear mention of the Planet Ocean which takes a lot of the design cues from those later 60s Seamaster 300s.

[@gzarrillo]

What a great episode

[@mmagbie1]

Not including the 2254.50 and the 2230.50 completely ignores the entire Peter Blake era of the Seamaster. This video has a glaring gap from 1996-2014. It’s disappointing that there was no effort to connect the MOD dial template originally used on the 165.024 to the modern 2254.50.

[@fordy83]

I also think the original Planet Ocean 2201.50 from 2005 deserves a mention.

[@miabeatz80]

The discussion was about the history of the Seamaster 300 not to be confused with the "300m" that you're referencing.

[@mmagbie1]

@@miabeatz80why include the Bond watch if you’re making that distinction?

[@j.burgess4459]

Great episode.

[@dragonniz]

I feel like at least the first generation planet ocean should be there on the table as well. Sure it's not a seamaster 300, but you can't help but see how the planet ocean line is the continuation of the old seamaster 300 with it's case, indexes, broad arrow hands & more.

[@FTube2000]

My thoughts too. Good point!

[@fordy83]

Yeah the 2201.50 dial is pretty much a modern 166.024 dial.

[@JamesMaccarone]

2254.50 that is all....

[@shaheenevans]

Very informative thanks team

[@ianwoollard2063]

If I buy another Seamaster the 300 will likely be the one. I enjoy the history. Currently rocking the Planet Ocean 8900. The Master chronometer movement technology is awesome. The latest version of the 300 is beautiful

[@XShotokanX]

I got the 2236.50 myself which I think is the queen of seamasteres. Applied white gold logo and indices makes it more refined than the regular 2254.

[@mmagbie1]

I couldn’t agree more. The 2236.50 is the queen and the 2230.50 is the king with their white gold bezels along with white gold applied logo and indices. My understanding is these models represent the first applied logo on a modern Seamaster.

[@baroh2413]

Well if you are looking for at tool watch "refined" is not necessarily a good thing. If you are looking for a dressy allrounder it is another story

[@jackm1310]

Amazing video

[@MBimmer]

👏🏼 great video guys 👌🏼

[@YusssoM]

Can you guys make one video on CartierTank? One of the most iconic watch with long production run. Would love to understand more about it.

[@RedwoodAggie]

We definitely needed this video. I was riveted every second. For me, like James, the 164.024 would be my pick. I really hope Omega chooses to come out with a new iteration of that on their next version. It's one of those watches that never had to grow on me. I just instantly loved it.

[@robynsjp]

There is no 164.024. It is 165.024. Mistake in their vid, but amazing their expert didn't spot it.

[@bash44]

great episode. seamaster 300 is my favorite omega watch. more beautiful than 300m

[@torontowatches9709]

Tudor Black bay was not first diver to bring back neo vintage divers mainstream, it was the Breitling Superocean Heritage

[@baroh2413]

Thank you for not hyping the Peter Blake. I just bought one and prices are still relatively low

[@fugitive88888]

This gonna be great

[@darrenhargreaves8613]

1993 SMP 36mm Bond on my wrist now !! Tritium and Fading bezel, gorgeous

[@Tuneitupful]

Great video

[@AmitBhandari82]

Fantastic episide. I'm glad a Reference Point episode has been devoted to Omega. So much rich history and incredible back catalogue. And for those commenting on why not mention the 2254 - the 300m is not the same watch / watch line as the 300. Two different Seamaster ranges.

[@mmagbie1]

Explain the Pierce Brosnan with the same case and movement.

[@AmitBhandari82]

@@mmagbie1 It doesn’t matter. The Brosnan watch is STILL a 300m.

[@mmagbie1]

@@AmitBhandari82so is this video on the 300 or 300m? You seem to make the distinction yet the Brosnan featured in this video is a 300M with Professional on the dial exactly like the 2254. The 2531.80 Brosnan featured in this video has the same name on the Omega website as the 2254 along with the same case and movement. If Omega has them listed as the same, how did you come to your conclusion that they belong to different ranges?

[@AmitBhandari82]

@@mmagbie1 the video was focusing on the history of the Seamaster 300. The Brosnan one was just briefly mentioned and they did emphasize even in the video that they're talking about the 300 line, and not the 300m. They are distinct models. The 2254 (one of my faves of all time btw), is a 300m which is why they never went into all the different variants of the 300m.

[@mmagbie1]

@@AmitBhandari82you have precisely illustrated my criticism. I do not see the value in including the Pierce Brosnan 300M if they are not going to include the rest of the 300M references. What value do you see in its contribution? It is represented as bridge between older models and the 2014 edition. This video appears rushed, incomplete, and undisciplined for a true Seamaster 300 reference collection. The repeated mistakes referring to a 165.024 as a 0:22 164.024 were glaring. This did not feel like a reference collection that should have been handled in-house but instead Hodinkee should have brought in a true expert.

[@PeterHenriksen-ph5uh]

Great video about a really great Watch. Had hoped you discussed the blue or blueish tinted bezels on the 60ties models. It seems there is some controversy about the blue bezels in different forums

[@MaestroDeca]

Why is it controversial?

[@davidrg1550]

This really is a fantastic video, the 300 IS what Omega should be pushing as their flagship dive watch But they need to get rid of that faux lume….. we’ve had enough of that.

[@antdte.5523]

Nice Seamaster!!!

[@Watchfreak1]

Love the Omega Seamaster

[@richardwarren2024]

Fantastic v video!

[@davidliu323]

22:29 I don't understand what he meant by the lume markers being recessed but it not actually being a sandwich dial. What's the difference? Is it because it's not an entire plate of lume under the dial and maybe just the areas under the cutouts? Even so, isn't that still a sandwich dial, just not a fully lumed back plate?

[@sympathyforthebezel6068]

Oh 🫰 something is coming down the road…could it be a modern 2254?

[@mattm1296]

I was really hoping Omega was going to reissue the 164.024 for the 75th anniversary. Been waiting for a modern version to accompany my vintage one

[@robynsjp]

There is no 164.024. The reference is 165.024, mistake in the vid. How on earth do their experts not even spot this and simply parrot "164.024" ???

[@mrbud8524]

Omega ❤

[@Jeff-11_354]

...and the first Rolex mention took less than two minutes 🤣

[@thegorn]

It’s always the elephant in the room

[@ajayr.5706]

Can we get a Seiko diver reference points?

[@WatchClyde]

Rich knows his stuff...Love collectors that's knowledgeable in timepieces like these.

[@evh4611]

So now you guys have to make a whole new video about the 2254.50. It has a sword hand you know

[@shuycg]

Are the loafers mandatory some sort of uniform? That camera angle was clearly bound to show more ankle than anything.

[@thegorn]

Hipsters

[@pauliewalnuts5241]

Yea I don't get it either. Seems very feminine to me.

[@ALL-il1sw]

Seamaster is a model range in which an entire collection can be built

[@thegorn]

The modern Seamaster 300 still isn’t quite there yet. There’s too much negative space. Get it down a mm to 40mm with 20mm lugs. Improve the bezel action. Print the 3,6, 9. Use AR only on the underside and flatten out the top of the boxed sapphire crystal. Use flat link bracelet but improve the clasp. Offer up some references without the “old radium” aged or custard lum. There’s so much more they can do.

[@MaestroDeca]

Sounds like the 2014 edition. Which is better than the 2021 in my opinion.

[@donrogan2812]

What's the deal with the socks???

[@ethanwyatt5699]

* starts searching the internet for vintage seamster *

[@Thierrystern]

Ben Clymer's no sock policy is spreading at an alarming rate of speed.

[@pauliewalnuts5241]

Men should wear socks IMO.

[@jason042779]

Sword hands!!

[@gambee_]

Really enjoyed this video but you have to tell people to stop sitting like that or at least put on some socks lol

[@Thomgxx100]

PUT ON SOME SOCKS !!!

[@fullymechanical9055]

Rich is trop cool for skool

[@brentwoods7450]

watches and ankles brought to you by Hodinkee

[@robynsjp]

At least they have shoes on 😂

[@EricRankin-pq9yf]

ERROR!!! You REPEATEDLY refer to the “164.024”. Wrong. And your slick graphics repeat the same mistake. There’s no such thing. It’s the 165.024 and the 166.024. And now you have commenters reposting the same misinformation. I know this sucks, but you should fix this.

[@robynsjp]

Made the same remark, they deleted my question. This SUCKS.

[@3082103]

the planet ocean is direct descendant of the 165.024 imo

[@mattmacine]

165.024 not 164.024 come on….

[@mmagbie1]

It is fair to say that Reference Points does not hold the standard as they used to.

[@robynsjp]

Pointed to this, they deleted my comment.

[@jazzperl7]

Missing the Peter Blake model, the most direct descendant of the old models, makes this episode almost silly.

[@philstadnicki7882]

The no sock brigade

[@robynsjp]

165.024 not 164.024 !!!!

[@edjack1993]

Don’t get me wrong, I geek out on the evolution of watches like this. But Malaika Crawford dares to offer a new/different perspective on watches and gets LOTS of flak. On the other hand, videos like this (which are interesting to me but arguably deeply boring) seem to be beyond reproach. Gotta love Hodinkee comments.

[@masterwatch]

the platinum 300 is the best.

[@netanelostrov3425]

Have you ever seen it in the metal? I’ve been thinking about buying it for years, and I’ve yet to meet someone who can give me some real world feedback about it:(

[@masterwatch]

@@netanelostrov3425 I've seen a copy homage and it was very good so I imagine the real thing is very nice.

[@SaltBhj]

Who died?

[@austinzizzi1142]

A 165.014 for me please

[@xekret]

Isn't it 165.024 and not 164.024? Such an expert would have known that......

[@rickfowler3710]

Dude forgot his socks

[@bastid968]

put some socks on

[@Vortex1988]

Omega needs to lose the fake patina.

[@ALL-il1sw]

I'd take fake patina over fake history any day

[@miabeatz80]

Those dials would look terrible with stark white indices. I think people who don't care for the "off white" (retiring the word fautina) should look at brands that have no imagination. Maybe if they went back to radioactive lume folks would be happier lol.

[@Tizianv]

Why are you guys not smiling more? Already at 1m20 you gyus sit there with boredom written all over your faces... what is happening?

[@johnporte3808]

Love the Seamaster 300