ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

yld2rob · 23 March 2016, 05:31 AM

So I went into my local AD to chat with my watchmaker about my 1680. I am no expert on this but it looks like an early Explorer model in excellent condition. I had to take a photo of it to share with you guys. The dial, hands and lume are are in excellent shape.

droptopman · 23 March 2016, 05:39 AM

Interesting. I do not recall ever seeing this model before. Cool!

Rameez-Q · 23 March 2016, 08:49 AM

Looks like a frankenwatch but hey I stand to be corrected.

clock · 23 March 2016, 08:56 AM

I owned a "California" dial on a Panerai Radiomir.
The movement in the original 1936 Panerai's were definitely made by Rolex; perhaps the dial too.

Never saw that model. Hopefully one of the experts will elaborate.

2ar2c1 · 23 March 2016, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clock

The movement in the original 1936 Panerai's were definitely made by Rolex

actually, Cortebert made the movements for Rolex: they supplied numerous movements to Rolex back in the day.

harry in montreal · 23 March 2016, 11:48 AM

I say redialed

yld2rob · 23 March 2016, 12:03 PM

He told me it was a rare California dial

MILGAUSS88 · 23 March 2016, 01:06 PM

I don't think the hands or the dial are correct.
I am not aware of Rolex using the California dial after the bubblebacks.

MILGAUSS88 · 23 March 2016, 01:27 PM

I think it is a ref 1003, And I cannot find any others with that dial on the internet.

jylimhk · 23 March 2016, 07:17 PM

Just saw this advertised here in Hong Kong for comparison:

https://www.facebook.com/TheVintageC...type=3&theater

adam78 · 23 March 2016, 07:53 PM

The dial is (incorrectly) refinished. Incorrectly, I say, because Rolex never intended a Roman-Arabic dial on this Oyster model. Also the originals never looked like this. It's a fanciful recreation.

adam78 · 23 March 2016, 10:32 PM

Here are examples of genuine such dials for comparison. The originals had the numerals stamped into the metal and filled with extra luminous material. The redials all have puffy lume, and the fonts aren't quite correct. And they were always for the smaller Oysters (30-32mm). Also, the hands on the OP's photo do not look right.

watchcrank · 24 March 2016, 02:18 AM

Sorry about that dial. Bit ugly too.

yld2rob · 24 March 2016, 05:24 AM

Thanks for all the input

23 March 2016, 05:31 AM	#1
yld2rob "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Real Name: Rob Location: Penna Watch: Rolex Posts: 1,658	What my Watchmaker was wearing So I went into my local AD to chat with my watchmaker about my 1680. I am no expert on this but it looks like an early Explorer model in excellent condition. I had to take a photo of it to share with you guys. The dial, hands and lume are are in excellent shape. Attached Images __________________ Rolex Sub-126610LV Rolex Sub- 126613LB Rolex GMT BLRO 126710 Rolex GMT BLNR Rolex Datejust 16220

23 March 2016, 08:49 AM	#3
Rameez-Q "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: UK Watch: Rolex Day Date, Posts: 666	Looks like a frankenwatch but hey I stand to be corrected. __________________ Vintage, Vintage & more vintage!

23 March 2016, 12:03 PM	#7
yld2rob "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Real Name: Rob Location: Penna Watch: Rolex Posts: 1,658	He told me it was a rare California dial __________________ Rolex Sub-126610LV Rolex Sub- 126613LB Rolex GMT BLRO 126710 Rolex GMT BLNR Rolex Datejust 16220

23 March 2016, 07:53 PM	#11
adam78 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,830	The dial is (incorrectly) refinished. Incorrectly, I say, because Rolex never intended a Roman-Arabic dial on this Oyster model. Also the originals never looked like this. It's a fanciful recreation. __________________ Cheers, Adam

23 March 2016, 10:32 PM	#12
adam78 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,830	Here are examples of genuine such dials for comparison. The originals had the numerals stamped into the metal and filled with extra luminous material. The redials all have puffy lume, and the fonts aren't quite correct. And they were always for the smaller Oysters (30-32mm). Also, the hands on the OP's photo do not look right. __________________ Cheers, Adam

23 March 2016, 05:39 AM	#2
droptopman "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Real Name: Mark Location: Washington State Watch: SUBS and GMT's! Posts: 9,664	Interesting. I do not recall ever seeing this model before. Cool!

23 March 2016, 08:56 AM	#4
clock Banned Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: in a house Posts: 13,510	I owned a "California" dial on a Panerai Radiomir. The movement in the original 1936 Panerai's were definitely made by Rolex; perhaps the dial too. Never saw that model. Hopefully one of the experts will elaborate.

23 March 2016, 11:48 AM	#6
harry in montreal "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Montreal Watch: The Habs pick 1st! Posts: 3,589	I say redialed

23 March 2016, 01:06 PM	#8
MILGAUSS88 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: mississippi river Posts: 3,192	I don't think the hands or the dial are correct. I am not aware of Rolex using the California dial after the bubblebacks.

23 March 2016, 01:27 PM	#9
MILGAUSS88 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: mississippi river Posts: 3,192	I think it is a ref 1003, And I cannot find any others with that dial on the internet.

23 March 2016, 07:17 PM	#10
jylimhk "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 8	Just saw this advertised here in Hong Kong for comparison: https://www.facebook.com/TheVintageC...type=3&theater

24 March 2016, 02:18 AM	#13
watchcrank "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: michael Location: Florida Watch: explorer II cream Posts: 1,664	Sorry about that dial. Bit ugly too.

24 March 2016, 05:24 AM	#14
yld2rob "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Real Name: Rob Location: Penna Watch: Rolex Posts: 1,658	Thanks for all the input __________________ Rolex Sub-126610LV Rolex Sub- 126613LB Rolex GMT BLRO 126710 Rolex GMT BLNR Rolex Datejust 16220

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