Help please!!! Vintage GMT 16758 Cir 1980s

[JacksonRain]

Hi everyone!

You my best friend is seriously considering purchasing a vintage GMT Master 18K gold piece.

My question has to do with some of the inconsistencies I'm seeing during years where the watch had a jubilee option for the bracelet.

Specifically, some of the examples on seeing come with a buckle and others have a hidden class.

Can you all tell me if both options were after? Was there a transition I'm where there was no buckle on the bracelet and it became hidden buckle for this particular reference?

Also, is oxidation on the gold normal? That red stain/ marks. Can it be cleaned off?

Also the hands, is that okay and normal? What are your thoughts on this example? Are there service parts?

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

[alwayshere]

this appears to be a 16718 which I think is more 1990's?

the 16758 is GMT Master, not GMT Master II, IIRC.

Anyway, those discolouration is not great. Its not just the hands but the lug area too. Not sure what they are asking for but assume a notable discount to account for that.

[TimeToGo]

.
Dial could have been swapped.

Check ref numbers on the case...

[JustinK]

Agree with TTG, I would expect to see a nipple dial on this watch, it was probably replaced during service. As to the tarnish it’s not out of the ordinary and some would pay extra for it.

The papers identify the watch as a 16758 with a 8386 bracelet which is the hidden clasp.

Looks like a nice watch except for the dial. I would definitely look at the serial to make sure the papers match as the dial is not correct for a 16758.

[77T]

As long as the actual serial number engraved between the lugs is the same as the paperwork, he is looking at a mid-‘80’s GMT Master II just as the dial states.

The mid to late ‘80’s through ‘90’s is a period where production of both Oyster, Tuna Can Jubilee and hidden clasps were used at AD’s if the customer wanted a different bracelet. [edit: Like someone said, the papers agree with what you see.] In fact, even Submariner bracelets found their way onto Expl.II’s and GMT’s and GMT-II’s as an option.

What your friend is looking at is a watch that spent a lot of time without decent maintenance on its exterior. Not making a value judgement, but the “don’t polish” cohort can leave a case and bracelet looking like that. Yes it can be cleaned but he’d want a very skilled vintage person to avoid over-polishing.

Don’t like the hands - this watch led a life that ended up with perished seals methinks - moisture inside (not necessarily water) has allowed microbes to take up residence and yield an unsightly paint devouring colonization. Hope the movement isn’t full of parts needing replacement.

Service parts are possible, like insert and the bracelet itself - you’d need to get the clasp codes photographed to see if it comports with a mid-‘80’s watch. No telling for sure when it was made from those pictures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[offrdmania]

Dont remove that patina IMO, the tarnish takes years and years to form on the gold. Taking it off would be like someone saying, "oh I want a nice shiny new dial with bright white lume, I dont like this discolored dark yellow lume" which took years and years to form.

[Pocosso]

Th dial has been swapped, as the watch it is a 16758 GMT, not a GMT II, said this, the watch looks great, if price is good I would go for it and then look around for a proper dial.
Watch is 1984/1985.
Do not touch the case, that oxidation make it awesome, I would bui it just for this.

[StanGMT]

I'm no expert on the gold GMTs, but should the hands and dial features not also be made of gold? In which case they shouldn't have deteriorated like in the pics, even with moisture ingress. As I say, I'm no expert and I might be completely off the mark, but I would be suspicious.

Stan.

[springer]

Originally Posted by StanGMT

I'm no expert on the gold GMTs, but should the hands and dial features not also be made of gold? In which case they shouldn't have deteriorated like in the pics, even with moisture ingress. As I say, I'm no expert and I might be completely off the mark, but I would be suspicious.

Stan.

Stan, what do you think about the GMT II dial on a GMT? That made me suspicious!!!

[JacksonRain]

Thanks everyone! We won't be getting this one

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk