Interesting.... *pics*
Hi Marco, please excuse the delay in replying ( I have been working in Cagliari & had limited internet access :-) )
It looks a lot like the 166.092 I know because I bought a case & dial about 18 months ago. My case back is 166.092.
here's a quick pic of mine
As you can see, I have no movement & some of the hour markers are loose on my dial. It is a real "rescue case" ( pun intended :-) )
HOWEVER !! looking through my online catalogues ( the website name is shown on the next pic ) I find this page...
Which is a UK catalogue from 1972. This CLEARLY shows the model number as 166.066, So this appears to suggest that 166.092 is the WRONG number.
So do I have a watch with the wrong caseback ? so I checked the pics a bit closer....
- Mine has a white dial
- The date window in mine is a square, with "sharp" corners
- Mine has "Swiss Made" written UNDER the hour markers
Neither the UK Catalogue nor your watch have these features.... so we are talking about 2 different watches here. They look 99% the same, but are NOT the same model.
So, now I looked in the Omega Museum Catalogue... here is the Entry for the 166.092
OMEGA Automatic Seamaster, 1971: Calendar calibre 1002,
Vertically satin-finished grey dial, minute track on yellow ring, polished riveted "baguette" hour markers with black plates and tritium dots, luminous stick hands and yellow center seconds-hand, two-piece steel case water-resistant to 60 m, laying oval style, sunbrushed bevelled bezel, polished case middle, screw-in back with grained Seahorse medallion, mineral crystal. New watch with original tag. Model launched in 1970. (ST 166.0092)
Which proves that the 166.092 is a correct ref for this style of watch & the 166.092 has a 1002 movement in it. Interestingly it mentions the dial that mine does NOT have.
Unfortunatley there is no entry in there for the 166.066 so I can't state what movement is in it. ( but I have read, elsewhere, that yours has a 565 ).
What I find very confusing is that Omega had 2 watches that are 99% the same with different movements ( the 1002 effectively replaced the 565 ) which were apparantly on the market at the same time.
I would guess the 166.092 replaced the 166.066. The main difference being the movement. And as usual the UK catalogues were "somewhat" out of date with their info.
I hope this helps
Steve
