The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 16 September 2011, 12:13 PM   #1
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
1675 GMT Hand Stack

Hello all:

I read in these forums that the correct hand stack for a 1675 places the red GMT hand on the bottom below the hour hand.

Just noticed that my (what are supposed to be original hands) do not indicate this as the GMT hand is above the hour hand.

Any idea how this could have happend?
Attached Images
 
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 12:15 PM   #2
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
an other pic
Attached Images
 
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 12:17 PM   #3
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
changed in service possibly.. actually most likely. If it has had a non rolex service they might just have put them back on in wrong order.
my 1675 goes from bottom to top ; red hand hour hand minute hand seconds hand.
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 12:45 PM   #4
kyle L
"TRF" Member
 
kyle L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: USA
Watch: Rolex Explorer I
Posts: 10,278
So the GMT hand rotates twice every 24 hours and the hour hand only rotates once in your case?
kyle L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 12:53 PM   #5
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle L View Post
So the GMT hand rotates twice every 24 hours and the hour hand only rotates once in your case?
nope, GMT is once a day and hour is every 12. Keeps perfect time in both time zones.
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 01:19 PM   #6
Saxon007
"TRF" Member
 
Saxon007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,002
You sure it is a 1675 and not a 16750?
__________________
Licensed to kill time.
Saxon007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 01:18 PM   #7
dddrees
"TRF" Member
 
dddrees's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Real Name: Dan
Location: USA
Watch: This N That
Posts: 34,253
Wrong position but it works correctly?
__________________
When it captures your imagination, that's when you know you have found your passion.

Loyal Foot Soldier of The Nylon Nation.

Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of
Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
dddrees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 02:50 PM   #8
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
yup, serial 61xxxxx. So a 1979 I presume??

and yes, wrong stack position and works perfectly.

Any GMT masters out there with an opinion or ever see this before?
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:05 PM   #9
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
yes a 16750 haas hand stacked like yours!! came in 1980? could be a crossover , very possible, or just and earlier case to movement too
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:12 PM   #10
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by toph View Post
yes a 16750 haas hand stacked like yours!! came in 1980? could be a crossover , very possible, or just and earlier case to movement too
wow, so now I am super interested in what I have on my wrist. I bought it from my friend who owns Honolulu Time, and is a very trust worthy dealer. I am almost positive that the hands and dial are original. Could the movement be a later service piece?

I assume it would have to be opened up to to be sure?
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:17 PM   #11
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
have you checked the case that it says 1675 and not 16750?
Even if it does say 1675 it might never have been used until they started using the upgraded movement on the 16750? Stranger things have happened.
Get the movement checked. Also movement could have been replaced but so woudl dial and hands probably at the same time.
Still a great watch but for peopel like us it nice to know what one has exactly
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:18 PM   #12
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
may i add that that dial was used on both the 1675 and 16750.
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:23 PM   #13
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
what about the time adjustment. Is the 16750 GMT non adjustable like the 1675? If I do have a 16750 movement the GMT hand is still non adjustable, just like a 1675.
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:31 PM   #14
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad Bigsby View Post
what about the time adjustment. Is the 16750 GMT non adjustable like the 1675? If I do have a 16750 movement the GMT hand is still non adjustable, just like a 1675.
Yeah, the independent red hand only came in 1983 with the introduction 16760 or Fat lady as its known as it had a thicker case too. it had 3085 movement

GMT 1675 had
1560/5 movement ( 0 on the end is the base movement but denoted with the 5 to reference modification of the date added to base calibre .
then the
1570/5 movement
and the 16750 had a 100m depth rating not 50 m and 3075 movement with a 28.8k bph rate over the 19.8k for the previous cal. 1575
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:46 PM   #15
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
cool, so I may have a transition year? Very exciting and I will get my friend to pull the back off just as soon as I can. Stay tuned and happy to hear from anyone else who wants to chime in.

Much Mahalo!
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 03:36 AM   #16
Submarino
"TRF" Member
 
Submarino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Mr. H
Location: Dallas
Watch: them for me!
Posts: 7,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad Bigsby View Post
cool, so I may have a transition year? Very exciting and I will get my friend to pull the back off just as soon as I can. Stay tuned and happy to hear from anyone else who wants to chime in.

Much Mahalo!
Base on the ref. and serial that watch should be a non-quick set calendar.

Is it non-quick set or quickset? That might help understand the movement situation.
__________________
WATCHES ARE THE NEW CURRENCY!/ MEMBER 27491/OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED OLD TIMER /AP OWNERS CLUB MEMBER

Instagram @watchcollectinglifestyle

Submarino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 04:13 AM   #17
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submarino View Post
Base on the ref. and serial that watch should be a non-quick set calendar.

Is it non-quick set or quickset? That might help understand the movement situation.
A non quick set, case says 1675 and yet the hour hand is on the bottom.
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 03:55 PM   #18
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
does the case say 1675 on it?
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 September 2011, 04:35 PM   #19
mike
"TRF" Member
 
mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
Stack.

1675 24 hr. on bottom





16750 12 hr. on bottom



mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 04:24 AM   #20
psv
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: USA & France
Posts: 11,078
Time to open it up.
psv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 04:48 AM   #21
GeoGio Greece
"TRF" Member
 
GeoGio Greece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: George
Location: Athens, Greece
Watch: es --> A lot !
Posts: 2,327
A friends 1675 , dated 1967 if I am not wrong, 24h on bottom.



__________________
Rolex owner since 1971. 5513 and 16700 the loved ones.

DJ WG Jubilee 16170 for wife - U series

Oyster Perpetual WG 177234 for daughter V-series
GeoGio Greece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 04:59 AM   #22
Submarino
"TRF" Member
 
Submarino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Mr. H
Location: Dallas
Watch: them for me!
Posts: 7,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoGio Greece View Post
A friends 1675 , dated 1967 if I am not wrong, 24h on bottom.



The issue here is that the 24H (red hand) is not at the bottom where it is supposed to be.
__________________
WATCHES ARE THE NEW CURRENCY!/ MEMBER 27491/OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED OLD TIMER /AP OWNERS CLUB MEMBER

Instagram @watchcollectinglifestyle

Submarino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 05:10 AM   #23
GeoGio Greece
"TRF" Member
 
GeoGio Greece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: George
Location: Athens, Greece
Watch: es --> A lot !
Posts: 2,327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submarino View Post
The issue here is that the 24H (red hand) is not at the bottom where it is supposed to be.
...yes, correct, but it was an opportunity to post my pictures of a decent one
__________________
Rolex owner since 1971. 5513 and 16700 the loved ones.

DJ WG Jubilee 16170 for wife - U series

Oyster Perpetual WG 177234 for daughter V-series
GeoGio Greece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 05:10 AM   #24
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submarino View Post
The issue here is that the 24H (red hand) is not at the bottom where it is supposed to be.
Yes, that is the issue
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 06:32 AM   #25
kyle L
"TRF" Member
 
kyle L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: USA
Watch: Rolex Explorer I
Posts: 10,278
Still trying to figure out how it works perfectly if the hands are stacked wrong...
kyle L is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 06:37 AM   #26
Konrad Bigsby
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 49
I am starting to think it may be a transitional year? Maybe a 1675 case with a pre quickset 16750 movement from the factory.

Is this possible?
Konrad Bigsby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 11:28 AM   #27
mike
"TRF" Member
 
mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad Bigsby View Post
I am starting to think it may be a transitional year? Maybe a 1675 case with a pre quickset 16750 movement from the factory.

Is this possible?
Not really. The dial feet are different for a 1675 vs. the 16750.
mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 05:50 PM   #28
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike View Post
Not really. The dial feet are different for a 1675 vs. the 16750.
of course you are right but that would make no difference if they just had a 1675 case and stuck a 16750 mov't ,hands and dial on it. This matte dial was laos used on both so from its appearnace it tells us nothing. I dont know if rolex could have done this but thats what he wants too know i think
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 September 2011, 09:45 PM   #29
mike
"TRF" Member
 
mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by toph View Post
of course you are right but that would make no difference if they just had a 1675 case and stuck a 16750 mov't ,hands and dial on it. This matte dial was laos used on both so from its appearnace it tells us nothing. I dont know if rolex could have done this but thats what he wants too know i think
True and a 16750 caseback works on a 1675, but I'd think Rolex would use a case marked 16750 for the 3075 movement. Who knows though. Opening it up will answer all.
mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 September 2011, 11:15 AM   #30
toph
"TRF" Member
 
toph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike View Post
True and a 16750 caseback works on a 1675, but I'd think Rolex would use a case marked 16750 for the 3075 movement. Who knows though. Opening it up will answer all.
I would tend to fully agree again but as you say, who knows, stranger things have happened
__________________


"Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

Member No.# 11795
toph is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.