Is this a franken watch?

[aliv023]

Hi guys,

a couple of months ago I bought my first 1675. I bought the watch because I loved the look of it is my first Rolex and since then I started learning about the 1675 story and details. I got the watch for $14.500. But the more I learn the more things are not adding up. I will list all the things I found and hopefully you guys can help me get more clear, so I learn from it. The watch is a MK1 Long E matte dial with the large arrow hand.

1. Is there any specific name for this fading of the color? It is a mix of pink / red and light purple.
2. The insert on the back is blue and not red. I am not sure if this means it is not correct / original. As far as I was reading it should have been red.
3. The date wheel has an open 9 and 6 and not a hooked 7.
4. The hands seem to be newer than the rest, because it is white and does not have the same patina as the rest.
5. The bracelet seems to definitely not to be original, it has a 78360 stamped on it. The endlinks: 501B and clasp: M12 and 78360
6. Now the serial number is the most tricky one, in the invoice from the dealer it is referred to starting with 1399... But it does not add up with the MK1 matte dial. The serial number, specially the upper part is almost invisible. I tried to see the number under the loupe and in my opinion it is not a 3, but clearly a 5, so the serial number would be 1599... So in this case it could make sense that it is a MK1 matte dial, right?
7. The date on the case back is stamped with: II 66 and the caliber is 1570. If it is really a 1599... serial number, shouldn't it say 1967?
8. The lugs seem to be polished as those nice edges which I now understand should be there are not.
9. If I put the watch under UV light, and then turn off the light, nothing glows, also not the "newer" looking hands.

I appreciate any help guys, I love the watch, but really want to understand as much as possible and learn from it for the future.

[TimeToGo]

.
We can try to baby step this one.

If it is 1.5m on the case, the case back 66 would match the case.

Did you verify the insert is a blue back?

Parts get changed during the life of a watch, specially one this old (to include hands, bracelet, etc.).

[TimeLord2]

Should definitely be in the Vintage Forum to answer your specific questions. Only thing I would say is it should have a red back insert (blue introduced in teh 16750 era, if not mistaken). Insert could be artificially aged or aftermarket as they are getting that good. Still looks very nice. The bracelet is definitely a newer model (78360 from later 1970s I think) as it should have a 7206 rivet bracelet. If the lume plots do not glow at all it has probably been relumed in the past although it does look like there is damage to those plots on 4, 5, 8, and 11. Also a crack in the GMT hand which should be stabilized. Hour and minute hand added after the relume maybe? Case does seem a bit odd. Could be the pics but the crown guards are a little flat on top and I would expect more of a chamfer on the lugs. Wait for the experts, I am not one. Although, TimeToGo is one. Very interested to see the responses as well.

[aliv023]

Yes I took off the insert and it was blue with like red scratches. According to what I could read ong the gmtmaster1675 it should have been red. Blue could also mean a service dial.
But they also say that on a service dial the top half of the number 8 is round, which it is not. It looks like an oval, which looks correct, so not sure what to make out of it.

[Dan S]

I'm not casting doubt on your dial, but for the best evaluation, it would be helpful to see photos of the dial with the hands moved so that they don't obscure the printing.

[av1atic]

insert and bracelet are newer, hands also likely replaced. lugs are way overpolished and missing the prominent chamfers these originally had.

[gates]

I doubt they did this but it almost looks like metal was added to the underside on the inside of the lugs - all 4 but I may be wrong, but to your original question no, it does not look like a franken watch to me, serviced/polished/updated parts yes but most old Rolexes have some of these attributes

[aliv023]

Originally Posted by Dan S

I'm not casting doubt on your dial, but for the best evaluation, it would be helpful to see photos of the dial with the hands moved so that they don't obscure the printing.

Sure here is another photo. Thanks for your input so far guys!

[TimeToGo]

.
You can see other pics of the watch here:

https://www.vintagechronos-germany.com/products/v439

.
The insert appears to be one of those known reps making their way in the market. See below:
.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/26677098473...gAAOSwN2ZmHZrl

[aliv023]

Thanks for sharing. This is exactly where I bought the watch from. So it means the insert is probably aftermarket and not genuine. Would you doubt the other parts of the watch?

[GGGMT]

If integrity and originality are important to you (assume not as you would’ve done all this groundwork before buying) I would return the watch and find something better. It’s been ‘rode hard and put down wet’


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeToGo]

.
From the learning stand point, the dial is usually where the $$$ - buy condition.
Always having a nice case is a plus, original and beefy is a ++ Although, it is also acceptable to have redone cases, as long as it is done proper and disclosed.
Insert of course is a +, for these vintage - nice Red backs are worth a couple to a few K's.

Your pictures are overexposed and the dealers pictures are underexposed (I am sure for a reason).

Obviously some damage to the dial plots, mismatch hands (a couple badly redone), and a newer bracelet.

Hopefully on your next buy, you can stop by before hand to discuss potential purchases.

[996marty]

Knowing that it’s not 100% right maybe you could approach the seller but that’s a decision only you can make

[TuRo]

Can you post engravings both ends perhaps - so we can confirm case is ok. C/Back looks fine.

[springer]

The watch has had some parts changed along the way during the past six decades. While this isn't that uncommon, it does happen.

Regarding your concern on whether your GMT-MASTER is a "Frankenwatch," that would be a question for you to decide. I have never warmed up to the term Frankenwatch and personally, I really am at a loss to define that term.

[aliv023]

Guys thank you for your input. I learned a lot and will think what to do with the watch. But definetely will look for all those things prior to buying next time.

[XavierM]

Hi,

2. As said above, I think the insert is aftermarket (1000-1500$ difference here...)

3. Regarding the datewheel, after looking at some posts here and there, consensus seems to be: Hooked 7 closed 6/9 and round 3.

4. Regarding the hands, I would have expected a small GMT hand and Zinc sulfide lume (UV reaction).

5. Bracelet is of course much later.

7. I would also have expected a 67 on the caseback if serial is 1,599,XXX but wouldn't be too sure of what to think here.

Considering the condition of the dial, the lume reaction (nothing) and the amount of service parts, I think this watch was born with a gilt dial and rebuilt later with parts from here and there.
Sorry to put it this way but I would definitely try to work on a refund with the dealer as there is not much value left in this watch IMO. The fake insert is definitely a good point to negotiate this without any fee on your side.

Good luck

[Mark020]

I had a 5513 with 1.56m serial and a VI 66 caseback

[TimeToGo]

Originally Posted by Mark020

I had a 5513 with 1.56m serial and a VI 66 caseback

[Dench]

If you still love the look of it, maybe keep it and get a refund for the insert. A nice fuchsia insert would go well with that dial.

[LugholeChris]

My 5513 has a 1.51 serial and also states 1966.

Beautiful watch too. Congratulations and enjoy it thouroughly. Unless you paid an absolute premiere and was promised that all was untouched and original, I would not worrh about parts having been changed, if you like those parts.