Need advise on 116710LN magnification

[miamirollie]

Hi guys so I picked up this 116710 Ln with blue lume no card from gray dealer near me. I posted my new watch on Reddit and a few people pointed out my magnification looks off. My bezel also has some up down left right play in it now that I’ve been really looking at it.

[miamirollie]

mag

[Neil McCauley]

Well, comparing it to the VTNR pictures, and every other GMT I’ve seen, it’s definitely not right. The laser etching seems too visible too, it shouldn’t be that easy to capture. You can even clearly see it in the second image. This is not a good sign.

Does this mean the watch is fake? Not necessarily, but that crystal most definitely is not a genuine Rolex part, at very least. Perhaps you could drop it into an RSC for full confirmation, or an AD at least. You’re not going to be satisfied until you do.

[miamirollie]

Originally Posted by Neil McCauley

Well, comparing it to the VTNR pictures, and every other GMT I’ve seen, it’s definitely not right. The laser etching seems too visible too, it shouldn’t be that easy to capture. You can even clearly see it in the second image. This is not a good sign.

Does this mean the watch is fake? Not necessarily, but that crystal most definitely is not a genuine Rolex part, at very least. Perhaps you could drop it into an RSC for full confirmation, or an AD at least. You’re not going to be satisfied until you do.

In that one photo it is visible but i think the sun was just right because i have it in my hand and I can't see it at all unless point a light from the 12 o clock.

The other close up photos took some time to get it that perfect.

[Ravager135]

There was generation of watches from this era that had poor magnification of the date. This was a known issue and if you search the forums here you’ll find numerous threads on it.

I am not an authenticity expert, but 116710LN GMTs (among other models) from around 2015 had issues with the cyclops magnification. It was hit or miss. Many were sent back to Rolex and were corrected. It was not an issue at all from late 2015 onward.

[miamirollie]

Originally Posted by Ravager135

There was generation of watches from this era that had poor magnification of the date. This was a known issue and if you search the forums here you’ll find numerous threads on it.

I am not an authenticity expert, but 116710LN GMTs (among other models) from around 2015 had issues with the cyclops magnification. It was hit or miss. Many were sent back to Rolex and were corrected. It was not an issue at all from late 2015 onward.

I searched only found the blue black bezel with that issue.

If the crystal is real could it be from another model? The lec is so good I can’t imagine they didn’t get the mag correct.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by miamirollie

I searched only found the blue black bezel with that issue.

If the crystal is real could it be from another model? The lec is so good I can’t imagine they didn’t get the mag correct.

Low-mag Cyclops was a widespread issue around 2014-15. So much so that Rolex removed the decades-old claim of x2.5 magnification from its website. Yours may be from that time, though someone else recently posted a new watch with the same problem. It wasn't only the blue/black bezel GMT-Master that was affected.

[miamirollie]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Low-mag Cyclops was a widespread issue around 2014-15. So much so that Rolex removed the decades-old claim of x2.5 magnification from its website. Yours may be from that time, though someone else recently posted a new watch with the same problem. It wasn't only the blue/black bezel GMT-Master that was affected.

Thanks for the info! Looks like i'm the lucky one.

[Ravager135]

Originally Posted by miamirollie

I searched only found the blue black bezel with that issue.

If the crystal is real could it be from another model? The lec is so good I can’t imagine they didn’t get the mag correct.

If my recollection is correct, it was not just the BLNR that had this issue. It’s been awhile though. The crystal would be identical in either model and thus I can’t see how the LN models would not have had this issue also. I just think the BLNR models got more attention as they were newer at the time and more sought after.

I don’t doubt your watch is authentic. The LN had been around a long time. There are variations in the clasp, crystal magnification over the course of the production. The 116710LN was really a transitional model in many ways. It was the first regular production, stainless steel, six digit model to get large production numbers. It existed alongside five digit references like the Explorer II and Submariner (no date) for some time.

[BigPapiDoesItAgain]

To my eyes it looks legit, though I agree there is something off with the mag, otherwise that watch looks real to me. Rehaut is perfect, dial and hands look good. If it's ersatz, its a really good one.

[KatGirl]

Take it right back to that dealer and get refund, if you think it’s fake..

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[padi56]

looks ok to me regarding the insert all ceramic bezel are on spring loaded ballbearings so there will be a tiny bit of up and down play, although mag does seem a bit low what year is the watch.

[miamirollie]

Originally Posted by padi56

looks ok to me regarding the insert all ceramic bezel are on spring loaded ballbearings so there will be a tiny bit of up and down play, although mag does seem a bit low what year is the watch.

I’m not sure I don’t have a card. From my research the only thing you can go by on this model is if it has a blue or green bezel. Blue was 14+

[JRell]

Are we 100% sure they used the laser etching cornet back then? Don’t panic, probably fine, just go back and discuss with your dealer.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by JRell

Are we 100% sure they used the laser etching cornet back then? Don’t panic, probably fine, just go back and discuss with your dealer.

It was from 2001 Laser Etched Hologram In Crystal started but not all models at the same time all ceramic inserts would have LEC in crystal.

[miamirollie]

The watch is legit I mean the thing is perfection everywhere.

Only two thing I’ve noticed is the bezel has some play not rotational play but bilateral. Not sure if that’s Caused by the glass dimensions if it’s aftermarket or some type of gasket ?

Glass magnification is very low and after using so many loop I do see a little debris behind the glass. Could be when they inspected during the appraisal ? More likely someone may have been in there prior.

[KatGirl]

Does it feel like your other Rolex? The clone makers cannot replicate the overall feeling of quality. If held in the hand by someone who is very familiar with Rolex, he/she can feel an intangible difference.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[miamirollie]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

Does it feel like your other Rolex? The clone makers cannot replicate the overall feeling of quality. If held in the hand by someone who is very familiar with Rolex, he/she can feel an intangible difference.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

First Rolex I only have a seamaster 300 but it feels real.

[JRell]

Originally Posted by miamirollie

First Rolex I only have a seamaster 300 but it feels real.

That is an Omega!!! First Omega I had was a Navitimer.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by JRell

That is an Omega!!! First Omega I had was a Navitimer.

? That’s a Breitling!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JRell]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

? That’s a Breitling!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

lol yes! My favorite Breitling was the Reverso! lol I misunderstood him with his sentence structure.

[Roddypeepa]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

Does it feel like your other Rolex? The clone makers cannot replicate the overall feeling of quality. If held in the hand by someone who is very familiar with Rolex, he/she can feel an intangible difference.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Wishful and naive thinking I’m afraid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[miamirollie]

Yup it’s a quartz early 2000s bond watch 👍. Love it

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by miamirollie

Yup it’s a quartz early 2000s bond watch . Love it

Also my first Omega!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Kevin of Larchmont]

That’s a helluva first Rolex, well done.

[miamirollie]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

That’s a helluva first Rolex, well done.

[DLCU2]

My SubDate (116610LN) from 2014 had the same mag issue. RSC NY corrected this when the watch was still under warranty.

[Kenny G]

That magnification definitely seems off to me.

I’d have it opened up. No fake will pass that test.

[thesharkfactor]

It’s all good in my opinion. Some of these had weak date mag around this time, it’s well documented.
Nice watch. Enjoy.

[Andad]

That is not a good pix of the laser applied crown.

Do you have a pix of the movement?