ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

redshirt1957 · 31 January 2009, 09:44 AM

Which is which?

Man, my posts have been dying a horrible death lately. Maybe need to go back to cold chili enlightenment.

Lowflight · 31 January 2009, 09:51 AM

1680=#2

mike · 31 January 2009, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lowflight

1680=#2

Omega_Precision · 31 January 2009, 11:36 AM

I'm going with #2 as well.

redshirt1957 · 31 January 2009, 11:38 AM

Okay, you guys give me a why.

gmt 16750 · 31 January 2009, 07:43 PM

Because your 1680 wears a 93150...?
and until recently every Tudor Sub had a folded link bracelet (you can get a solid link 78500 [think that's the right ref.] for a Tudor now) but I cant recall your Tudor wearing one.
Both v. nice watches anyhow.

- Neil

buz-lh · 31 January 2009, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gmt 16750

Because your 1680 wears a 93150...?
and until recently every Tudor Sub had a folded link bracelet (you can get a solid link 78500 [think that's the right ref.] for a Tudor now) but I cant recall your Tudor wearing one.
Both v. nice watches anyhow.

- Neil

I think Neil is correct.

Trurolexer · 31 January 2009, 10:31 PM

both!!!

swatty · 31 January 2009, 10:42 PM

I won't mind which one you send me , either one is fine , Thanks Bubba

JimSnyder · 31 January 2009, 10:52 PM

What Neil said and Buz backed up. I'm double backing it up

swatty · 31 January 2009, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimSnyder

What Neil said and Buz backed up. I'm double backing it up

I agree too , Jim

JimSnyder · 31 January 2009, 11:24 PM

I will add besides the folded link bracelet the bezal in pic 1 looks more worn. And the lume dot on pic 2 looks white and that is the way I rememder your 1680

I don't think your 9411/0 had a lume dot

I could be wrong

Jimbits76 · 1 February 2009, 12:34 AM

I haven't got a clue!!!!

What I will say is .....

I need a cuddle!

J

Lowflight · 1 February 2009, 12:51 AM

The reason I went with #2 is because the crystal on the first one is different than any of the three variations I have seen on 1680. Plus, the upturn of the bezel looks different.

BTW, I have a 9315 folded link bracelet on my 5.2 million 1680

dkpw · 1 February 2009, 01:36 AM

Number 2 - what ever one it is - I think it's the 1680 - has the Rolex crown at exactly the same angle as my Sub.

Great side views!

stevemulholland3 · 1 February 2009, 04:14 AM

well I will tell you one clue I can see..many tudor cases seem to have two different sized thickness of the crown guards..I am not sure why,but I do know they came from the factory this way(some say that rolex sent all of their cases that did not pass the quality standards tests to tudor to use with their subs,<just hear-say>) and your picture number 1 seems to show the same phenomenon in the thickness of the crown guards..or its just a trick of photography...so do tell joe..

JimSnyder · 1 February 2009, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevemulholland3

well I will tell you one clue I can see..many tudor cases seem to have two different sized thickness of the crown guards..I am not sure why,but I do know they came from the factory this way(some say that rolex sent all of their cases that did not pass the quality standards tests to tudor to use with their subs,<just hear-say>) and your picture number 1 seems to show the same phenomenon in the thickness of the crown guards..or its just a trick of photography...so do tell joe..

God eye Steve. I didn't notice that. A lot of Tudors do have that

redshirt1957 · 1 February 2009, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevemulholland3

well I will tell you one clue I can see..many tudor cases seem to have two different sized thickness of the crown guards..I am not sure why,but I do know they came from the factory this way(some say that rolex sent all of their cases that did not pass the quality standards tests to tudor to use with their subs,<just hear-say>) and your picture number 1 seems to show the same phenomenon in the thickness of the crown guards..or its just a trick of photography...so do tell joe..

Cheater! Seems I bought both from you.

Yes, the first one is the Tudor and the second one is the 1680. If I would have removed the bands and rotated the bezel so you could not see the peal, the only difference is the crown guards. I must say that the members here have a memory I never had and pay attention to detail. I am just amazed at you guys.

therolexguy · 1 February 2009, 04:25 AM

#2 definately a 1680. Don't know the Tudor line as well.

unclesallie · 1 February 2009, 09:37 AM

i knew the answer all along, was just waiting to see if you guys knew too!

NOT~!

best,
dan

31 January 2009, 09:44 AM	#1
redshirt1957 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Real Name: Bubba Location: Bitsyville! Watch: Blue YM today! Posts: 10,053	Rolex 1680 or Tudor 9411/0? Which is which? Man, my posts have been dying a horrible death lately. Maybe need to go back to cold chili enlightenment.

31 January 2009, 07:43 PM	#6
gmt 16750 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Real Name: Neil Location: Borders, Scotland Watch: what your doing. Posts: 970	Because your 1680 wears a 93150...? and until recently every Tudor Sub had a folded link bracelet (you can get a solid link 78500 [think that's the right ref.] for a Tudor now) but I cant recall your Tudor wearing one. Both v. nice watches anyhow. - Neil __________________

31 January 2009, 10:52 PM	#10
JimSnyder "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Jim Snyder Location: Ohio Watch: Ask me later..... Posts: 7,726	What Neil said and Buz backed up. I'm double backing it up __________________ "You ain't lived, 'til you've had your tires rotated by a red-headed women."

31 January 2009, 11:24 PM	#12
JimSnyder "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Jim Snyder Location: Ohio Watch: Ask me later..... Posts: 7,726	I will add besides the folded link bracelet the bezal in pic 1 looks more worn. And the lume dot on pic 2 looks white and that is the way I rememder your 1680 I don't think your 9411/0 had a lume dot I could be wrong __________________ "You ain't lived, 'til you've had your tires rotated by a red-headed women."

1 February 2009, 01:36 AM	#15
dkpw "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: David Location: Scotland Watch: 16610 & 214270 Posts: 1,294	Number 2 - what ever one it is - I think it's the 1680 - has the Rolex crown at exactly the same angle as my Sub. Great side views! __________________ Sub 16610, Explorer 214270, Ω Speedy Pro & many others. David

31 January 2009, 09:51 AM	#2
Lowflight Banned Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Harold Location: On The Far Right Posts: 1,106	1680=#2

31 January 2009, 11:36 AM	#4
Omega_Precision Banned Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Henry Location: CA, US Watch: ing basketball Posts: 2,977	I'm going with #2 as well.

31 January 2009, 11:38 AM	#5
redshirt1957 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Real Name: Bubba Location: Bitsyville! Watch: Blue YM today! Posts: 10,053	Okay, you guys give me a why.

31 January 2009, 10:31 PM	#8
Trurolexer Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex Posts: 18,421	both!!!

31 January 2009, 10:42 PM	#9
swatty 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Peter Location: Sydney Watch: The Game Posts: 17,415	I won't mind which one you send me , either one is fine , Thanks Bubba

1 February 2009, 12:34 AM	#13
Jimbits76 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: UK Posts: 9,407	I haven't got a clue!!!! What I will say is ..... I need a cuddle! J

1 February 2009, 12:51 AM	#14
Lowflight Banned Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Harold Location: On The Far Right Posts: 1,106	The reason I went with #2 is because the crystal on the first one is different than any of the three variations I have seen on 1680. Plus, the upturn of the bezel looks different. BTW, I have a 9315 folded link bracelet on my 5.2 million 1680

1 February 2009, 04:14 AM	#16
stevemulholland3 Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: steven Location: tampa bay Watch: 1680 18k sub Posts: 6,672	well I will tell you one clue I can see..many tudor cases seem to have two different sized thickness of the crown guards..I am not sure why,but I do know they came from the factory this way(some say that rolex sent all of their cases that did not pass the quality standards tests to tudor to use with their subs,<just hear-say>) and your picture number 1 seems to show the same phenomenon in the thickness of the crown guards..or its just a trick of photography...so do tell joe..

1 February 2009, 04:25 AM	#19
therolexguy 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: Todd Location: US Posts: 3,528	#2 definately a 1680. Don't know the Tudor line as well.

1 February 2009, 09:37 AM	#20
unclesallie 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Real Name: dan Location: Pennsylvania Watch: keystone pocket Posts: 5,917	i knew the answer all along, was just waiting to see if you guys knew too! NOT~! best, dan

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