Thoughts on this GMT 1675

[Gob Bluth]

Friends: I'm planning to buy this watch tomorrow from a reputable seller/watch repairman. He bought it from the original owner who had it serviced in 2013. It's unpolished and everything is original but the gaskets, etc.; crystal; and bezel insert.

I'm posting to ask whether anyone sees any red flags here. Thanks in advance for the help.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[383magnum]

I have the same watch circa 1971 and from the pictures, it looks like everything checks out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gob Bluth]

A gentleman on VRF says the dial is redone. Any second or third opinions?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lol-x]

The dial does have some issues, if you look at the hour markers they seem to have crators...that is not natural aging and it seems that there may have been some re-touching on the dial.
However, more notable is the end links which looks to be too small (19mm instead of 20mm).
Also the date wheel appears to be white whereas it should be silver, so I would suggest that this is a replacement date wheel.
Of further concern, is the springbar which is pushing outside the edge of the lug at 1:00 O'Clock, the lugs may not have been polished, but I can't be sure about that. Perhaps the spring bar is a replacement and the wrong size, I don't know.
All in all, I suggest giving this some second thoughts.

[Gob Bluth]

I'm going to pass on the watch given the issues. Thanks for the help. TRF FTW.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vincent65]

Looks like a pretty good MKI/longE to me, but I'm not an expert. Some of the Tritium has flaked off, but that's not uncommon. Doesn't appear refinished to my eye.

The US-made C&I bracelets' end-links often do not fit exactly between 20mm lugs because they were made using the 'imperial'/inches system, not metric/mm. I've been reliably informed some were even stamped 11/16 3/4 by the maker (eg JB Champion). I have a US-made jubilee with a similar slight gap - not a snug fit. Not an issue. Case looks good. bracelet looks good.

[DerbyCopa]

yo te puedo decir que aunque se trata de un Mark I, tiene los indices con el tritio desprendido, no me gusta.. y las agujas, parecen reemplazadas al igual que el insert. la caja aunque parece no estar pulida, no estaria seguro, ya que los pasadores sobresalen mucho en la caja.

[springer]

Originally Posted by Gob Bluth

I'm going to pass on the watch given the issues. Thanks for the help. TRF FTW.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The dial has an excessive loss of tritium on the markers. I do not see anything from the photos to indicate the dial is refinished. The bezel insert is a service replacement and the end links are a little loose, possibly 19mm, maybe not (see the photo below which depicts a GMT with the USA Oyster bracelet). The date wheel should look like the one pictured below. Spring bars do not appear correct either.

[Vincent65]

Originally Posted by springer

The dial has an excessive loss of tritium on the markers. I do not see anything from the photos to indicate the dial is refinished. The bezel insert is a service replacement and the end links are a little loose, possibly 19mm, maybe not (see the photo below which depicts a GMT with the USA Oyster bracelet). The date wheel should look like the one pictured below. Spring bars do not appear correct either.

Since when were you a stickler for correct date-wheels!?
But spring-bars are surely a deal-breaker, I agree

[swish77]

And another thing ... not sure I agree with the assessment that the case has never been polished. The case looks pretty good, but it has evidence of polishing, especially the top right lug.

[1675-David]

Being a bit of a case freak I wouldn't agree with the "unpolished" description from what can be seen in these images. I'm compairing your 1675 with the one on my wrist (also an unpolished Mk1 from 1970) and mine appears to be a lot more unpolished than yours!

[springer]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

Since when were you a stickler for correct date-wheels!?
But spring-bars are surely a deal-breaker, I agree

Never have been...but thought it would be proper to get it correct since it is being discussed.

[05carbondrz]

Originally Posted by swish77

And another thing ... not sure I agree with the assessment that the case has never been polished. The case looks pretty good, but it has evidence of polishing, especially the top right lug.

Originally Posted by 1675-David

Being a bit of a case freak I wouldn't agree with the "unpolished" description from what can be seen in these images. I'm compairing your 1675 with the one on my wrist (also an unpolished Mk1 from 1970) and mine appears to be a lot more unpolished than yours!

I agree 100%

[Vincent65]

Originally Posted by springer

Never have been...but thought it would be proper to get it correct since it is being discussed.

I agree - I was just pulling your 'hooked 7' date-wheel, J!

[springer]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

I agree - I was just pulling your 'hooked 7' date-wheel, J!

[chessebj]

Definitely not the right end links, and the bezel insert has of course been replaced. The crown guard appears to be a bit asymmetrical, but that happened OOTB with some of the older Rolex watches. It doesn't look bad. Better than my 1675, anyway. What is the price?