Newbie here. Hello

[eatt_river]

Originally Posted by swaini3

I dont see the link between a case being refinished/polished and the dial.

A pretty nice dial on refinished (to my untrained eye) case. Bracelet is “after market” one, a Hong Kong made according to seller whom I trusted.
Cal 1570 with hacking second feature, serial on case at 6 o’clock 1,4M, ref No at 12 o’clock “1501”, same ref No on case back inner and production date “IV65”.

[eatt_river]

Pretty dial but case quite polished (photo of inner lugs in above entry) Do you see inconsistency please?
Bracelet a replica one.

[eatt_river]

Originally Posted by swaini3

I dont see the link between a case being refinished/polished and the dial.

I meant: dial is quite decent (nice & correct hue for lume plots, light patinage with sunbursts still present on dial lacker) vs worn case (traces located between lugs on above pic.)

Is this inconsistency plausible please?

[TuRo]

Nobody's commented on the Tiffany aspect.
Is it 100% correct ?....as if so the dial will be 80% of the watches value and the (over) polishing is a pimple on an elephants backside, so to speak.

[eatt_river]

Originally Posted by TuRo

Nobody's commented on the Tiffany aspect.
Is it 100% correct ?....as if so the dial will be 80% of the watches value and the (over) polishing is a pimple on an elephants backside, so to speak.

Thank you @TuRo for interacting with me on my 1501 example. I actually traded in this piece (this 1501 asking price in Vietnamese currency is equivalent to roughly 2,2k USD).
TBH I was mostly attracted by the clean dial, Tiffany wording on it wasn’t the decisive factor for me to ‘pull the trigger’. Please note that this 1501 ref was my very first Rolex although I have had several vintage Swiss watches beforehand.

I learned somewhere that jeweler brand name such as Turler or Tiffany was added afterward by these brands. I meant if there weren’t jeweler names I would still buy this example.

In close inspection and under magnifier lens on my dial ink print of “Tiffany…” is sort of thinner, not as embossed as the usual wordings “superlative chronometer officially certified” for Rolex ones. Color hue of “Tiffany…” wording is also different to the rest of ink print on my dial. Sorry I can’t describe hue color difference but in person this seems obvious to everyone eyes.

Have a nice weekend

[TimeToGo]

.
Hey OP, saw your post in the Rolex Reference Library - "Double-signed/co-branded Rolex dials: Pics from every known retailer" Thread.

I am posting in your initial thread to see if we can further discuss your double signed dial.
IMO based on what I see, it is not an authentic Tiffany dial. These were copied to take advantage of the higher asking prices because of the prestigious brand.

Here is some comparisons:

First your dial, Comparison of markings, and finally another fake dial listed on Ebay by Vietnam Seller:

[eatt_river]

Originally Posted by TimeToGo

.
Hey OP, saw your post in the Rolex Reference Library - "Double-signed/co-branded Rolex dials: Pics from every known retailer" Thread.

I am posting in your initial thread to see if we can further discuss your double signed dial.
IMO based on what I see, it is not an authentic Tiffany dial. These were copied to take advantage of the higher asking prices because of the prestigious brand.

Here is some comparisons:

First your dial, Comparison of markings, and finally another fake dial listed on Ebay by Vietnam Seller:

Thank you for reacting @TimeToGo.
Ink print for Tiffany on my dial is clearly different that that on the rest on dial (no embossed, color hue more brownish, fat font type, etc…)
Vintage Rolexes are really a mine field

[eatt_river]

Macro photo for future reference on "Tiffany Co" dial



Hi-rez photo in my Google Photo Album

https://photos.app.goo.gl/6Q91eAx4Ag9jb4nHA

[TimeToGo]

.
Don't try to fit a square into a circle...

Here is your macro photo and the one on Ebay:
.

[eatt_river]

Originally Posted by TimeToGo

.
Don't try to fit a square into a circle...

.

Sorry I am not native English speaking and may not understand what you mean above.

I too think my ‘Tiffany’ dial is suspicious, so that’s why I asked here. Macros pics I posted above were just for reference purposes.

Thank you for educating me on double signed Rolex counterfeiting.

[NickD1975]

Originally Posted by eatt_river

Sorry I am not native English speaking and may not understand what you mean above.

I am native English speaking and I don't know what he means either!

[eatt_river]

Good morning TRFers😊

Watch head is now in watchmaker shop for servicing. I asked him to show the stop lever (hacking second feature). Seems it was too hard for him to take in pic the tiny component. Instead he told me “stop lever is connected straight out to setting lever”.
As some TRFers stated above, for a 1501 (#ref) with IV-65 stamped on my case back, code denoting a last quarter 1965, ‘hacking second’ would be too early for this cal 1570. Do you think my cal had been swapped in the past?
Thank you in advance.

[Dan S]

I have been collecting data on the non-hacking/hacking transition, and I have not yet found any hacking watches with a serial number below 2.6M. Your serial number is 1.4M, and that is a very large discrepancy.

[eatt_river]

Originally Posted by Dan S

I have been collecting data on the non-hacking/hacking transition, and I have not yet found any hacking watches with a serial number below 2.6M. Your serial number is 1.4M, and that is a very large discrepancy.

I see your point and would like to know what had been done on my watch (for the sake of curiosity)