ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

tudorman8276 · 23 October 2008, 04:35 AM

...DISCUSSION. WOW!!!!

...look at the wording above the model #....mmmm...

...appears to have been HAND SCRIBED. IF otherwise genuine, WHY would someone do that to the wording and not just leave it alone???? They made a mess out of it.

...additionally, in the side view, notice the THICKNESS of the crown guards...one is NOTICEABLY thicker than the other.

...just a point of interest...the band is a 7206. However, whoever did the band work, put the 7206 centerlink on UP-SIDE DOWN.

...what say the GMT knowledgeable folks????

Stan.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLEX-Vintage-GM...QQcmdZViewItem

Quicksilver · 23 October 2008, 06:58 AM

I am not GMT knowledgable but that hand inscription looks totally crazy.

TimeToGo · 23 October 2008, 07:11 AM

Very interesting.

States the glass and case have never been polished, BUT was fully serviced two years ago?
Also, your point about the thickness of a crown guard is right on!
According to references I have seen on Model 1675, the proper marking for the end link should be "58."

Also on the hand scription (shaky hands at that) is right on as well! This makes a legitimate watch tampered with, for what reason?

Orchi · 23 October 2008, 10:07 AM

Err buddy Stan...nice catch...!

It's gross misrepresentation...by the Seller's descriptions of the watch being "as new"
...Case never been re-polished...which are NOT true...

The Dial does NOT originally belong to this watch Case 1.58 million series...in "66".
The Hands don't belong to the watch originally...

Dial/Hands n bezel are later replacements...

The Crown has been changed...the lug holes are a bit bigger...

springer · 23 October 2008, 10:43 AM

The dial is refinished. The seller is deceptive in his descriptions of the watch as noted here by forum members. And on...and on.

I'd stay clear; many better examples out there for sale. Here are some of mine to compare.

23 October 2008, 04:35 AM	#1
tudorman8276 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: STAN Location: KY-USA Watch: Rolex Prez Posts: 12,583	...as NEW GMT for... ...DISCUSSION. WOW!!!! ...look at the wording above the model #....mmmm... ...appears to have been HAND SCRIBED. IF otherwise genuine, WHY would someone do that to the wording and not just leave it alone???? They made a mess out of it. ...additionally, in the side view, notice the THICKNESS of the crown guards...one is NOTICEABLY thicker than the other. ...just a point of interest...the band is a 7206. However, whoever did the band work, put the 7206 centerlink on UP-SIDE DOWN. ...what say the GMT knowledgeable folks???? Stan. http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLEX-Vintage-GM...QQcmdZViewItem

23 October 2008, 06:58 AM	#2
Quicksilver "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: David Location: London+Guangzhou Watch: ing watches Posts: 2,603	I am not GMT knowledgable but that hand inscription looks totally crazy. __________________ Rolex Sea Dweller 116600, GMT Master II 16710 (Pepsi) and 116710 BLNR, Daytona 116500LN, Submariner 14060M.

23 October 2008, 10:43 AM	#5
springer 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: jP Location: Texas Watch: GMT-MASTER Posts: 17,319	The dial is refinished. The seller is deceptive in his descriptions of the watch as noted here by forum members. And on...and on. I'd stay clear; many better examples out there for sale. Here are some of mine to compare. Attached Images __________________ Member of NAWCC since 1990. INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics.

23 October 2008, 07:11 AM	#3
TimeToGo 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: North Florida Posts: 16,736	Very interesting. States the glass and case have never been polished, BUT was fully serviced two years ago? Also, your point about the thickness of a crown guard is right on! According to references I have seen on Model 1675, the proper marking for the end link should be "58." Also on the hand scription (shaky hands at that) is right on as well! This makes a legitimate watch tampered with, for what reason?

23 October 2008, 10:07 AM	#4
Orchi Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Malaysia Posts: 2,934	Err buddy Stan...nice catch...! It's gross misrepresentation...by the Seller's descriptions of the watch being "as new" ...Case never been re-polished...which are NOT true... The Dial does NOT originally belong to this watch Case 1.58 million series...in "66". The Hands don't belong to the watch originally... Dial/Hands n bezel are later replacements... The Crown has been changed...the lug holes are a bit bigger...

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