Can Anyone here Identify this Rolex Submariner?

[Boaters]

Rude ... Really if you were up front about the piece from the start it would be ending a lot better than it is. Honesty is the best policy. Good luck.

[harry in montreal]

You have to understand that we get loads of the same’story’;
1. My uncle died and left me this Rolex
2. I found this Rolex on the street
3. I have this old Rolex and I can’t remember where I got it

They are all stories about passing off fake Rolexes. We get excited when it ends up being legit

You are asking us for something. Some free advice. You aren’t adding better photos as we asked. We assume the worst especially when you say you will just throw it away. This pretty much means that we were correct in that you bought it as a fake a few years ago.

Why keep posting replies and not a better pic of the watch ? Why ?

[SANDIEGO]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

You have to understand that we get loads of the same’story’;
1. My uncle died and left me this Rolex
2. I found this Rolex on the street
3. I have this old Rolex and I can’t remember where I got it

They are all stories about passing off fake Rolexes. We get excited when it ends up being legit

You are asking us for something. Some free advice. You aren’t adding better photos as we asked. We assume the worst especially when you say you will just throw it away. This pretty much means that we were correct in that you bought it as a fake a few years ago.

Why keep posting replies and not a better pic of the watch ? Why ?

I understand your concerns, and thank you for taking the time to "talk" to me. I was being facetious about "throwing it away" in response to the reply's of "it is probably a fake". I really did not want to remove the back... But I will and post pictures today. Thank you for your time.

[SANDIEGO]

Originally Posted by SANDIEGO

I understand your concerns, and thank you for taking the time to "talk" to me. I was being facetious about "throwing it away" in response to the reply's of "it is probably a fake". I really did not want to remove the back... But I will and post pictures today. Thank you for your time.

I tried to upload the pictures but it says the resolution too high. I will fix that and send again. Okay, I got them to upload. I could not get the back off as I don't have a tool to do that. I can get it removed if that will help. Thank you for your time.

[koronet-kid]

The case and engraving look ok to me, does look like a badly refinished dial would be worth getting a watch maker to remove the case back so you can confirm the movement is good I wouldn’t throw it out if I were you

[Greglaw]

Originally Posted by SANDIEGO

All I did was ask legitimate questions about a watch I have. And know nothing about. (1) Anyone have any information on it (2) Does anybody know how much it might be worth. I cannot believe how rude some of the responders are. This is the most rude, accusing, forums I have ever been on. Sorry to apparently have hurt some peoples feelings or something.

You've been on this forum for 10 years. You have had the watch somewhere in the range of 40 years. And now you ask with wide-eyed wonder what you have?

As my mother would say, tell it to the kids on the street.

[harry in montreal]

Looks like some of it is real!

[Jackie Daytona]

Just following through this thread. In my opinion it is quite likely just a poor redial by whichever jeweler.

In the 70s, 80’s and early 90’s nobody really made as big a deal about Rolex or originality or any of what they do now. I do find it fairly likely some semi clueless/careless jeweler just did it. In those times it would not have been something so shocking IMO.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

Looks like some of it is real!

I agree, but I'm kind of losing interest TBH.

[SANDIEGO]

Originally Posted by Greglaw

You've been on this forum for 10 years. You have had the watch somewhere in the range of 40 years. And now you ask with wide-eyed wonder what you have?

As my mother would say, tell it to the kids on the street.

I don't know what your problem is, but you obviously have one . I have two private emails from normal people telling me the watch is authentic from the pictures and yes the face and bezel had been replaced with other than the ones belonging on it. I assumed that this forum was for people seeking information, not wise ass remarks. It's people like you who ruin forums like this.

[harry in montreal]

I think everyone needs to ease up on the poster. I think we assumed the worst but he has a nice watch that has an interesting history.

[SANDIEGO]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

I think everyone needs to ease up on the poster. I think we assumed the worst but he has a nice watch that has an interesting history.

Thank you Harry, I do appreciate your help and responses. Peace... Dave

[HK_Expat]

If one thing has been messed with….how many other things have been too…..If there’s any doubt…..pass

[77T]

Originally Posted by SANDIEGO

Okay, I got them to upload. I could not get the back off as I don't have a tool to do that. I can get it removed if that will help. Thank you for your time.

I think you might want to get the back off via a vintage watchmaker here on TRF. Not for us - but for yourself and to get a true evaluation, plus a cost to replace the dial (that is, if it is the only thing that’s incorrect).

The folks who PM’d you saying “authentic” may have jumped the gun just on the pics alone. And some detractors have mistakenly jumped to the far side of saying it’s fake.

Like some have said, the engraved serial number and ref.# look good but not enough detail to judge from that alone. You might need to stare at this pic, and then your watch, and judge for yourself.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[alwayshere]

Originally Posted by SANDIEGO

Another person on this forum who hasn't a real life and no knowledge of what they are talking about. The only life they have is to troll forums they have no knowledge about and try to stir up shit. I feel sorry for them.

Hey lets not start insulting people now. You started on the wrong foot by writing your first post like you receive the watch as-is then when questioned, subsequently revealed a lot more adding to people's skepticism.

You've now added better photos which is helpful but if you want to receive proper feedback, I suggest you stay on topic, i.e., discuss the watch in question and not infer whether people have lives or not. If you haven't noticed, you come here for advice, seeking knowledge that comes from people spending parts of their life researching this stuff. Don't sh1t where you eat.

With that said and stating the obvious, i'm clearly not done with this thread but with better photos, i'm obliged to at least share my views but hopefully some of experts might be able to chime in as well.

1) The case looks genuine. Typeface B engraving which is consistent for a 1969/1970 Rolex 5513. Also looks like a 702 crown which I believe is original to that era too (the 700 crown transitioned out already from memory).

2) The dial is interesting. Its 100% not original to 1970 era but is more akin to the pre-comex era, ala much later in the 70's.

I need others to opine but the dial printing / spacing actually looks very close to a genuine dial (see example below). I see a couple of inconsistencies but frankly if this is a repaint, its one of the best i've seen, IMO. I would struggle to believe this came from the 1980's as the fakes weren't as good back then - again, your story isn't really adding up for me but i'll park that for now.

Therefore, there is a small chance that the dial is genuine but for some reason, someone added the subsequent wording below "submariner". Who knows. The lume plot also looks relumed.

Anything else you want to disclose on the watch? this watch is a bit of a mystery




http://www.5513mattedial.com/PreCOMEX.html

[Juhuatai]

If the watch was really serviced in the 80's maybe the watchmaker had a tudor lying around or something and that's why the text was added. I've seen weirder things.

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by 77T

I think you might want to get the back off via a vintage watchmaker here on TRF. Not for us - but for yourself and to get a true evaluation, plus a cost to replace the dial (that is, if it is the only thing that’s incorrect).

The folks who PM’d you saying “authentic” may have jumped the gun just on the pics alone. And some detractors have mistakenly jumped to the far side of saying it’s fake.

Like some have said, the engraved serial number and ref.# look good but not enough detail to judge from that alone. You might need to stare at this pic, and then your watch, and judge for yourself.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

hmm, it looks to me like the op's crown is too big, or the case is too small.

[alwayshere]

Oh forgot to mention the hands are aftermarket

[Greglaw]

Originally Posted by SANDIEGO

I don't know what your problem is, but you obviously have one . I have two private emails from normal people telling me the watch is authentic from the pictures and yes the face and bezel had been replaced with other than the ones belonging on it. I assumed that this forum was for people seeking information, not wise ass remarks. It's people like you who ruin forums like this.

And I contribute and have been a part of several watch forums. For many years. Rather than cause trouble here, send it to Rolex for a service. Or one of the recommended service folks, ie, LA Watchworks, Rollieworks or the Ridleys. Then let us know about the outcome. At least they won’t confiscate the fake dial. People like you post these fake watches, play the victim, then start this nonsense. Get some new material, this is old hat.