(Fake?) 1665 Seadweller question - and a hello

[rollhans11]

Hey fellow Rolex enthusiasts,

I registered on RF a few days ago. Thanks for accepting me as a new member.

I have been enthusiastic for Rolex watches (in particular vintage ones, including older stainless steel models like the 16570, 16600, 16710, 14060,...) for over a decade. I really don't like the shiny new models. I am from Austria, where good quality vintage Rolex watches are difficult to buy. I do own a 1665, but it's in poor condition (service dial, strongly polished case and caseback) and I am not really happy with it.

I have thought about getting my original 1665 back to a level where I would appreciate it, sourcing a MK4 dial and matching hands, and a largely unpolished caseback, having the parts mounted in the course of a service at our local AD. When looking for a caseback, I found a seller on eBay who sold quite a few in recent months. The caseback engravings look fine, but are spaced quite awkwardly. The crowns are almost touching the grooves were the opener attaches. Also, by comparing, I did not find an identical caseback on documented authentic 1665s. Of course, I know that there are several versions of the Great White caseback - not talking about later "non-patented" or service versions, but original ones with subtle differences on the outside (and inside) engravings. However, this looks pretty "unique" to me - is it possible that this is a high-grade aftermarket piece?

Alternatively, I also consider buying a top quality 1665, with B&P and all original parts. More or less by coincidence, looking for a MK4 with nice brown markers with matching hands and pearl, I noticed a 1665 on Chrono 24 that I like quite a lot and is located in manageable distance. Also, the price is negotiable and the seller has great feedback. It does have that same strange caseback and comes with B&P, but I am not sure whether this is the real deal or possibly a high-grade fake or Frankenwatch.

Maybe, somebody can chime in on the matter?

Thanks in advance for any help,

Hans

As I am not allowed to post links, you can find the watch on chrono24 with this title "rolex-sea-dweller-1665-mk4-hazelnut-dial-full-set-1977s"

[swish77]

I've seen many creative descriptions of vintage Rolexes but never "Hazelnut." And like most of the others, it's simply a way to explain or glamorize a damaged or badly aged dial.

I wouldn't even bother trying to authenticate this watch. The lume has obvious issues and at a minimum is very unattractive.

[Swearengen]

Hazelnut yes it looks like a squirrel burried the dial in the ground

[swaini3]

Hi and welcome,
here is the link for others to see:https://www.chrono24.com/rolex/rolex...id26966392.htm
Looks like a MK3, not a MK4. Insert is no good. Tool kit for later Sea dwellers, not the 1665. I would have a close look at the warranty paper.
Caseback- I see some deviations from the genuine ones. (front and back). I doubt its genuine.

[rollhans11]

Thanks guys for your opinions so far, and especially swaini3 for posting the link.

Regarding the color of the markers, I understand these are not really evenly colored - which many find undesirable - but I really like this "worn" look. Regarding the toolkit, I also noted this doesn't fit the watch, but I've come across several sellers who added other accessories to make the set look more complete. So that's not an immediate red flag in my view. The caseback so far is the biggest issue. swaini3 - if you don't mind sharing, where do you see differences inside the caseback? Any other deviations from regular genuine casebacks except the crowns moved towards the grooves?

[rootbeer7]

What’s got a hazelnut in every bite :)

[rollhans11]

Thanks guys for your opinions so far, and especially swaini3 for posting the link.

Regarding the color of the markers, I understand these are not really evenly colored - which many find undesirable - but I really like this "worn" look. Regarding the toolkit, I also noted this doesn't fit the watch, but I've come across several sellers who added other accessories to make the set look more complete. So that's not an immediate red flag in my view. The caseback so far is the biggest issue. swaini3 - if you don't mind sharing, where do you see differences inside the caseback? Any other deviations from regular genuine casebacks except the crowns moved towards the grooves?

[KY..]

I sure didn’t know Great White 1665’s are up to 40k now.
Gotta love it.

[swaini3]

Originally Posted by rollhans11

Thanks guys for your opinions so far, and especially swaini3 for posting the link.

Regarding the color of the markers, I understand these are not really evenly colored - which many find undesirable - but I really like this "worn" look. Regarding the toolkit, I also noted this doesn't fit the watch, but I've come across several sellers who added other accessories to make the set look more complete. So that's not an immediate red flag in my view. The caseback so far is the biggest issue. swaini3 - if you don't mind sharing, where do you see differences inside the caseback? Any other deviations from regular genuine casebacks except the crowns moved towards the grooves?

Just compare the letters, spacing, font etc. inside the case back- Check the X and the STAINLESS STEEL for eg.
On the outside, I've attached a pic to show one of the differences (and it's not because of polishing). The gen sample is of the same era.

[rollhans11]

Thanks, that was very helpful - also for taking the time to compare the photos.

So, it's pretty obvious indeed when you look at the right spots, thanks. Looks like this is a no go. BTW, I have checked the seller's other offerings, and he has another 1665 with an - in my opinion - pretty obvious aftermarket/fake back. So maybe the one discussed above is not an outlier but probably a professional outlet of questionable watches? Still, I wonder about the good feedback (580 reviews). In any case, I will look elsewhere.

Apart from that, if you don't mind - have a look at the completed listing on ebay, for example article 285202504901. To me, the back looks pretty similar, so maybe this is a source of "high-grade" (if you will) aftermarket parts? The seller also has a Daytona bezel and GMT caseback for top dollar.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by rollhans11

Regarding the color of the markers, I understand these are not really evenly colored - which many find undesirable - but I really like this "worn" look.

This is not just a "worn" look. The tritium is damaged, perhaps through moisture, or it might even be artificially made to look like this in a failed attempt to add nice patina.

Do yourself a favor and look for a better 1665, and note the concerns about authenticity above. Here's one of my former SDs, with patina the way it should be.

[rollhans11]

Thanks swish77, that is indeed a wonderful example, they don't get much better, do they. I will avoid the discussed 1665 for the reasons mentioned and am really grateful for the help. The condition of the case of your specimen is phenomenal.

swaini3 - my previous reply fell through or was not approved. Thanks for taking the time to do a photo comparison. The differences are now pretty obvious, in addition to the misaligned crowns. The seller has another 1665 up for sale, which looks very questionable. Obviously I am going to avoid the seller and now look to get my original 1665 restored to a worthwhile quality or look for a different one.

If you don't mind, have a look at the completed listings on ebay searching for "rolex 1665 case back" and you will find the ones mentioned in the original post. Maybe these are from the same source - high quality aftermarkets, sold for the price of a genuine?