|
|
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
|
2 November 2011, 08:40 AM
|
#1 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: ChrisTOPHer
Location: Sydney
Watch: Rolex, Brellum,
Posts: 12,601
|
clearly the guy has made a mistake about the date of the watch. 1.1 as you say is most likely 64. that is it . He shows the service dial on watch etc etc. Original dial is also not original to the watch but is a later original rolex dial. I doubt he knows that. Really dont think he is doing that badly compared to the real thiefs.
__________________
 "Where no counsel is the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." Member No.# 11795 |
|
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
Hybrid Mode
