ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

pdoukas · 2 November 2011, 03:15 AM

Regarding a Long E 1675 MK1 Matte Dial, did all of them have "singer" printed on the back or were there other vendors that manufactured those dial.

Thanks,

Pete

pdoukas · 2 November 2011, 06:04 AM

I did a little more research and have determined there were 3 manufacturers of dials during that time period. So now, did all three sign the back of their dials?

I've located a MK1 Long E dial but it is not signed in the back nor does it have that "brassy" look, so I'm a little inclined to believe it is a fake although the fonts and the other signs say otherwise from the front.

Pete

pdoukas · 3 November 2011, 01:55 AM

Anyone want to take a shot in the dark and comment on authnticity before I jump the gun on this dial? My concern is that neither singer, stern, or beyeler is stamped on the back. But damn the front looks authentic.

Thanks in advance,

Pete

azguy · 3 November 2011, 02:44 AM

If it's real, it's really clean

Cortez y Ramon · 3 November 2011, 03:42 AM

the engraved is very light, are you sure that there is?

Singer is the producer of the long E

pdoukas · 3 November 2011, 03:50 AM

I know precisely where you got your image, but if you look at mine you'll not see singer. It is not a written name but stamped and I do not see a stamp in the one I am looking at.

Pete

Cortez y Ramon · 3 November 2011, 03:57 AM

Strange. Anyway I think it is original

Luciano

pdoukas · 3 November 2011, 04:09 AM

It certainly seems authentic from the front. The font is dead on. I just don't know what to do here.

P

springer · 3 November 2011, 01:49 PM

Pete, that blank-back dial of yours looks genuine to me. Late 1960's vintage I believe. Can't explain why it's not stamped, but I wouldn't let it bother me. It's definitely not a redial and all things Rolex aren't engraved in stone - as we all know.

pdoukas · 3 November 2011, 02:29 PM

I got an emal from the seller stating it was actually stamped but his camera skills were not good enough to capture it (lack of a macro lense/function) I'll watch it and see whether I go forward with it.

John, I agree that it certainly seems authentic and I have heard such where not all backs are signed. We'll see.......

Pete

Submarino · 3 November 2011, 10:15 PM

Looks good to me!

ROGERB · 4 November 2011, 12:46 AM

Looks FANTASTIC to me!

R

eparisini · 4 November 2011, 01:53 AM

Ciao Luciano!
It looks original to me too... maybe a better pic can solve yours doubts

Lamone · 4 November 2011, 02:36 AM

Nice dial, Buddy Orchi might be able to shed some more light in this dial.

2 November 2011, 03:15 AM	#1
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	GMT Dial Questions (1675) Regarding a Long E 1675 MK1 Matte Dial, did all of them have "singer" printed on the back or were there other vendors that manufactured those dial. Thanks, Pete

3 November 2011, 01:55 AM	#3
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	Anyone want to take a shot in the dark and comment on authnticity before I jump the gun on this dial? My concern is that neither singer, stern, or beyeler is stamped on the back. But damn the front looks authentic. Thanks in advance, Pete Attached Images

3 November 2011, 03:42 AM	#5
Cortez y Ramon Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Italy Posts: 85	the engraved is very light, are you sure that there is? Singer is the producer of the long E Attached Images

3 November 2011, 01:49 PM	#9
springer 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: jP Location: Texas Watch: GMT-MASTER Posts: 17,319	Pete, that blank-back dial of yours looks genuine to me. Late 1960's vintage I believe. Can't explain why it's not stamped, but I wouldn't let it bother me. It's definitely not a redial and all things Rolex aren't engraved in stone - as we all know. __________________ Member of NAWCC since 1990. INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics.

3 November 2011, 10:15 PM	#11
Submarino "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Mr. H Location: Dallas Watch: them for me! Posts: 7,180	Looks good to me! __________________ WATCHES ARE THE NEW CURRENCY!/ MEMBER 27491/OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED OLD TIMER /AP OWNERS CLUB MEMBER Instagram @watchcollectinglifestyle

2 November 2011, 06:04 AM	#2
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	I did a little more research and have determined there were 3 manufacturers of dials during that time period. So now, did all three sign the back of their dials? I've located a MK1 Long E dial but it is not signed in the back nor does it have that "brassy" look, so I'm a little inclined to believe it is a fake although the fonts and the other signs say otherwise from the front. Pete

3 November 2011, 02:44 AM	#4
azguy Banned Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: ------- Location: ------- Watch: --------- Posts: 12,609	If it's real, it's really clean

3 November 2011, 03:50 AM	#6
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	I know precisely where you got your image, but if you look at mine you'll not see singer. It is not a written name but stamped and I do not see a stamp in the one I am looking at. Pete

3 November 2011, 03:57 AM	#7
Cortez y Ramon Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Italy Posts: 85	Strange. Anyway I think it is original Luciano

3 November 2011, 04:09 AM	#8
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	It certainly seems authentic from the front. The font is dead on. I just don't know what to do here. P

3 November 2011, 02:29 PM	#10
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	I got an emal from the seller stating it was actually stamped but his camera skills were not good enough to capture it (lack of a macro lense/function) I'll watch it and see whether I go forward with it. John, I agree that it certainly seems authentic and I have heard such where not all backs are signed. We'll see....... Pete

4 November 2011, 12:46 AM	#12
ROGERB "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Roger Location: WHITE ROCK BC Watch: 89 16610, 57 7914, Posts: 897	Looks FANTASTIC to me! R

4 November 2011, 01:53 AM	#13
eparisini "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Emanuele Location: Italy Watch: 6263 FAP Posts: 795	Ciao Luciano! It looks original to me too... maybe a better pic can solve yours doubts __________________ EAT, DRINK AND BE MAUI

4 November 2011, 02:36 AM	#14
Lamone Banned Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: NYC Watch: ya mawt! Posts: 3,448	Nice dial, Buddy Orchi might be able to shed some more light in this dial.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)