ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Aventura · 1 November 2013, 09:58 PM

Today I read a thread about replacement crystal in a used Rolex watch.
Most of the guys gave an advice that this is wrong and better return the watch.
I ask: What is wrong with a replacement crystal? Why is better send the watch back??

Cc1966 · 1 November 2013, 10:01 PM

Points to consider: is it a genuine Rolex service crystal; was the replacement crystal disclosed prior to the sale; if not disclosed before sale, what else remains undisclosed. Buy the seller...

cop414 · 1 November 2013, 10:05 PM

I think that most opinions were, as was mine, if the crystal was replaced why was it replaced? Did the watch possibly suffer other damage when the damage which caused damage to the original crystal? It is not known to the poster on that thread I assume who installed the non OEM crystal. Was it done properly, pressure tested, new seals? Lots of unanswered questions. I think that the consensus of the members here was better safe than sorry if the OP has the option of returning the watch. Just my 2 cents.

padi56 · 1 November 2013, 10:52 PM

Well reading that post we don't really know if the crystal was replaced as no real information how he found out it was replaced.As today some genuine Rolex crystals have no LEC and many don't have the S as a service replacement, as been reported by our in-forum watchmakers and a sapphire crystal is just a sapphire crystal.

powerfunk · 1 November 2013, 10:58 PM

To me, absolutely nothing is wrong with a genuine Rolex replacement crystal. It's good to replace it at service. But if it's so new that it shouldn't have needed a service yet, or the crystal is non-Rolex, that's when it's an issue to me.

kilyung · 1 November 2013, 10:59 PM

It has everything to do with disclosure for me.

Chainring · 1 November 2013, 11:01 PM

I just had the crystal replaced in my P series GMT Master II. The P series is not considered a vintage model nor does it have a LEC. I had a very tiny scratch on the crystal that bothered me so I got it replaced with a genuine Rolex crystal. Now it looks new again. I don't see a problem with that.

EDIT: But I will disclose that if I ever decide to sell this watch.

Tools · 2 November 2013, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aventura

Today I read a thread about replacement crystal in a used Rolex watch.
Most of the guys gave an advice that this is wrong and better return the watch.
I ask: What is wrong with a replacement crystal? Why is better send the watch back??

As Peter mentioned, there is nothing wrong with a replacement crystal and the poster doesn't really say how he came to that conclusion. You cannot tell the difference from one to another except for the latest coronet etched ones..

Sometimes though, it is just nice to know and have all "Rolex" parts on your watch.. some folks are really picky about that..

1 November 2013, 09:58 PM	#1
Aventura "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Miami Beach FL US Posts: 1,425	What is wrong with a replacement crystal?? Today I read a thread about replacement crystal in a used Rolex watch. Most of the guys gave an advice that this is wrong and better return the watch. I ask: What is wrong with a replacement crystal? Why is better send the watch back??

1 November 2013, 10:01 PM	#2
Cc1966 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Real Name: Christopher Location: Georgia, USA Watch: ing the Sea... Posts: 6,713	Points to consider: is it a genuine Rolex service crystal; was the replacement crystal disclosed prior to the sale; if not disclosed before sale, what else remains undisclosed. Buy the seller... __________________ "I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way." Captain John Paul Jones, 16 November 1778 "*Curmudgeons* " Favorites: 1665 SD, Sub Date, DSSD, Exp II, Sub LV, GMTIIc

1 November 2013, 10:05 PM	#3
cop414 TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Apr 2012 Real Name: Tim Location: Pennsylvania Watch: 14060M Posts: 72,244	I think that most opinions were, as was mine, if the crystal was replaced why was it replaced? Did the watch possibly suffer other damage when the damage which caused damage to the original crystal? It is not known to the poster on that thread I assume who installed the non OEM crystal. Was it done properly, pressure tested, new seals? Lots of unanswered questions. I think that the consensus of the members here was better safe than sorry if the OP has the option of returning the watch. Just my 2 cents. __________________ Rolex Submariner 14060M Omega Seamaster 2254.50 DOXA Professional 1200T Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons TRF's "After Dark" Bar & NightClub Patron P Club Member #17 2 FA ENABLED

1 November 2013, 10:52 PM	#4
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 53,063	Well reading that post we don't really know if the crystal was replaced as no real information how he found out it was replaced.As today some genuine Rolex crystals have no LEC and many don't have the S as a service replacement, as been reported by our in-forum watchmakers and a sapphire crystal is just a sapphire crystal. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

1 November 2013, 10:58 PM	#5
powerfunk "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Real Name: Rob Location: Boston, MA Watch: 1530 Posts: 3,799	To me, absolutely nothing is wrong with a genuine Rolex replacement crystal. It's good to replace it at service. But if it's so new that it shouldn't have needed a service yet, or the crystal is non-Rolex, that's when it's an issue to me.

1 November 2013, 10:59 PM	#6
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	It has everything to do with disclosure for me.

1 November 2013, 11:01 PM	#7
Chainring "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Real Name: Steve Location: Grand Junction CO Watch: A few, not enough. Posts: 1,725	I just had the crystal replaced in my P series GMT Master II. The P series is not considered a vintage model nor does it have a LEC. I had a very tiny scratch on the crystal that bothered me so I got it replaced with a genuine Rolex crystal. Now it looks new again. I don't see a problem with that. EDIT: But I will disclose that if I ever decide to sell this watch.

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