Vintage Heuer / TAG Heuer watches, and a few others. Plus Handmade straps..

Heuer Diver 973.006 / 2000 Series

with 28 comments

Heuer Diver 2000 Series 973.006 1984-5

There are some Heuers that disappear into the twilight zone period of late Heuer/early TAG Heuer, and this is one such watch. A benefit of this period is that these late pieces are much easier to date, especially this model. It is listed in the 1984 catalogue and probably only had circa 12 months of selling time before the TAG takeover. This is why these ‘twilight dwellers’ are so difficult to find, either to buy or even research.
This makes them incredibly rare, not necessarily in the ‘worth a fortune’ way, but in scarcity.. you’d be hard pressed to find one in several years of looking. Even trying to Google this model will most probably (at time of writing) only come up with a few hits, and those are likely to be for the TAG Heuer version. Even trawling through the Heuer catalogues on OTD will yield no results (the TAG version is present), it’s not even in the rather extensive diver master table. (the 2000 series isn’t covered yet – at time or writing).

It is however listed in the index of the 1984 Heuer catalogue, and in the 1985 catalogue, but actual pictures aren’t available on OTD, good job I’ve a old catalogue kicking around – see pics below.

This particular model was the largest they made in the ‘973.xxx’ 2000 divers, signified by the Heuer code of ‘006’ being 41.5mm inc. the crown.  What is very satisfying about this model are the ‘pointing away’ triangles for the hour markers , they have a very classic vintage shape to them, and a more tool-like appearance. It had a no-nonsense military look to it with it’s factory beadblasted case & bracelet. It’s a nice size too, with 20mm lugs and slim profile at just under 9mm, it’s just crying out to sit on a NATO. But, personally, this is one model that looks great on the standard Heuer bracelet or vintage leather. In short, this is one cool and very scarce diver.

973.006 in the Heuer 1984 Catalogue


Written by Heuerville

October 15, 2011 at 5:24 pm

28 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I have one of these 973.006 the Tag Heuer version, purchased in 1991 from “watchworld” in Buffalo for $482. It is a beautiful watch, and has stood up very well to daily wear. I appreciated reading this article.


    December 31, 2011 at 2:46 am

  2. I have one, but trying to find an extra link for the stainless steel Heuer band.

    Anyone now where I can get one, or the model number to the link????

    Thank You


    February 3, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    • I’m afraid I don’t know the bracelet number right now, I’ll check tomorrow to see if there is one.
      This model was also produced in TAG Heuer guise, so an authorised dealer may be able to supply a link, they usually don’t cost much.


      February 3, 2012 at 8:29 pm

  3. I’ve one for sale that has just been refurbished. It has the metal strap and looks as good as the one in the above pics.
    Any idea if anyone would like to purchase?


    March 23, 2012 at 8:14 pm

  4. Just stumbled upon this excellent post. That’s a fantastic looking leather band you put on this watch. What kind is it? Where can I get one?


    July 17, 2012 at 1:09 pm

    • Hi Gabe.. the strap is called ‘Messina’ available from here in varying sizes: http://www.watch-band-center.com
      I roughed mine up to give it a well worn look.


      July 17, 2012 at 1:14 pm

      • Thanks for that super fast reply to my question. 🙂 It’s nice to see that such great strap are readily available. The web site says they measure the width by the size of the buckle, which confuses me a bit. Does that mean that if I want a strap that is 20mm wide at the lugs I need to get one that has a 22mm buckle width? Sorry if this is a dumb question, but the only straps I have bought in the past have used the measurement at the lugs.


        July 17, 2012 at 1:33 pm

      • It lists the strap size by lug width, and also shows the buckle width in brackets.. so It’ll say 20mm strap (with a buckle width of 20mm). These straps don’t taper, so a 22mm strap will have 22mm buckle.


        July 17, 2012 at 1:38 pm

  5. I’ve got the Heuer version with the steel bracelet, been a great watch over the years. I bought it for about £ 300 in 1984/5. This is a fascinating site, didn’t Heuer make some great watches, better the the TAG-Heuer bling they market today. keep up the good work. John.

    John Clarke

    November 20, 2012 at 9:52 pm

  6. i have a 973.006 i am looking to sell , i have owned from new in 1984 … any offers please contact


    May 20, 2013 at 9:20 pm

  7. What an interesting read and Thank You.

    I’ve owned a 973.006 since 1984. It’s seen some serious action over the years and it’s still going strong. The original bracelet is still as good as the day I bought it and so is the movement. Never misses a beat. The date still ticks over nicely too. The lume has seen better days but it was never the greatest to start with TBH.

    Still got the original box, inserts and receipt.

    Cost £185 from a bespoke dealer back in December 1984


    May 26, 2014 at 7:40 pm

    • It’s so refreshing to hear stories like this.. it’s all good and well buying a vintage watch, but having one from new and living with it for 20-30 years is fantastic. enjoy your watch my friend. Thanks for sharing.


      May 26, 2014 at 11:59 pm

  8. I’ve just received a 973.006 that I stumbled upon without any prior experience with Heuer divers and I can’t believe the quality. For a watch this vintage it’s amazing. It barely shows any wear, it keeps great time and for a ‘medium’ size watch it fits great with the 20mm and is very comfortable. Anyone considering a Heuer or this model in particular won’t be disappointed.

    Al from Oz

    April 2, 2015 at 10:37 am

  9. Hello, Bought my Heuer 2000 (973.006) in Sydney in 1985, and it’s been the most brilliant watch.

    Around 15 years ago, during service, the crown was replaced with a TAG Heuer version.

    Didn’t think too much about it at the time, but is annoying me now.

    Have spotted NOS Heuer crowns on eBay, but want make sure I buy the right type (Tag Heuer can’t supply one).

    Can anyone help on the spec, diameter, push-in (or not), etc. As well as the best place to buy.

    Many thanks.

    James Cleary

    March 13, 2016 at 1:30 am

  10. Hello,

    Recently received my fathers 973.006. Was hoping to get an original crown. Do you know where I could get a heuer crown or know the size of the original crown?

    Moyukh Ghosh

    November 4, 2016 at 7:18 pm

  11. Hi is the crown a screw down crown on this?


    January 11, 2017 at 11:42 pm

    • Usually, yes. However some Heuers (usually earlier than this) also had push-in crowns. So it’s hard to say with 100% accuracy that they were all screw down.


      January 12, 2017 at 12:31 am

      • The reason i asked is because mine doesnt screw in. it is free moving. anyways thanks for the clarification.


        January 12, 2017 at 1:03 am

  12. John,
    It may be that there is a problem.. or it may be that it is a push-in crown. Easy way to check, it to have it pressure tested.


    January 12, 2017 at 2:59 am

  13. I have a 973.006 Heuer 2000 that I purchased new in late 1985. It’s had the screw-in crown replaced with the Tag Heuer logo’d crown. The stainless band is now quite worn after all these years of wear, but the watch is still very nice. I’ve been looking for a new stainless band, but is it practical to have the old one (with its Heuer clasp) refurbished, new pins, etc.?

    Stanlet Munn

    August 14, 2017 at 5:25 pm

    • Stanlet, I’ve sent you an email, I have a spare bracelet you might be interested in.


      August 14, 2017 at 10:21 pm

      • Glad to see people keeping this legend great looking watch alive.


        August 15, 2017 at 1:06 am

  14. Hi, would you happened to know what kind of lume is used in this model? I have a Tag Heuer 2000 that is clearly indicated T SWISS MADE T on the dial, which is Tritium, but my Heuer 973.006 doesn’t have this indication.. is it Radium, or was it not mandatory to indicate the T for tritium?


    April 20, 2020 at 2:13 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: