ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Z-Sub · 30 June 2012, 10:20 AM

on this sale item from TRF?

I've never seen an authentic bezel insert with a pearl looking like this one. small, recessed pearl does not look right to me. the rest of the watch seems alright.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=241325

T-Rip · 30 June 2012, 10:22 AM

At looks really odd.. I'm wondering if it's just an aftermarket bezel?

STEELINOX · 30 June 2012, 10:45 AM

Yup.

Looks lka imposter to me...

The SEL sits a tad too shallow from the deck for my likin too...

But thats just me

Ebruner · 30 June 2012, 12:45 PM

That pearl is pretty scary. From the photos it's hard to say much else about the watch though.

-Eddie

GradyPhilpott · 30 June 2012, 01:26 PM

The whole watch looks suspicious to me.

onkyo · 30 June 2012, 03:27 PM

I have not seen a pearl look like that..... strange.

roach7 · 30 June 2012, 04:03 PM

looks like an aftermarket insert.

brian8121 · 30 June 2012, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roach7

looks like an aftermarket insert.

x2

Goiguidoc · 30 June 2012, 08:12 PM

Very suspicious bezel insert!
Never heard about this problem and never seen one like this.

mrbill2mrbill2 · 30 June 2012, 08:32 PM

Funky bezel pearl and not a straight-on dial pic.

Make this watch very questionable.

Welshwatchman · 30 June 2012, 09:03 PM

Firstly, I have seen this member on other forums and he certainly seems to be in good standing everywhere.

He mentions that he obtained the watch here and I've found the original posting.

*** not ****

USA seller but seems certain to be the same watch. No pics or mention of the W.O.S receipt and papers, but he does mention irrelevancies such as a caseback sticker and cloth.

Perhaps just a lazy seller.

For me, the insert is wrong. I've spent the last five minutes comparing this insert with the face-on pic MK1 example on VRF as well as a 2004 F from a specialist who I'd trust with my cash all day long.

The one here differs from the other two which are identical.

The pip surround looks wrong, forget the pearl slippage. I've had my 16610 and 16610LV under a 20X loupe just now and both insert surrounds are different to the one in the pic.

... also the insert markers number font thickness and the 0s on the insert are wrong but bear in mind I am comparing directly to the "reference" on VRF only. Others can state if there is a further variation of the MK1 insert not referenced to on VRF.

Please don't post here unless you have a concrete view. No "seems" posts padding this thread out more than it needs but collectors with a good eye are welcome to state their view.

Should it transpire that the insert is wrong then the original seller should make amends with Newboy and the watch be de-listed here until a proper insert is fitted.

I've asked MAtt Wu, the original seller, for additional information.

mboverst · 1 July 2012, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

He mentions that he obtained the watch here and I've found the original posting.

*** not ***

The watch in the link was originally Zack's (jizjizjiz), which Matt bought...that piece did not have papers and definitely a different pearl. I'll let Matt respond, but I thought he traded it in to a dealer in LA.

BOA · 1 July 2012, 03:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

He mentions that he obtained the watch here and I've found the original posting.

*** not **

He's posted in the linked thread that the watch was purchased on TZ, not TRF.

azguy · 1 July 2012, 03:26 AM

am I missing something, as newsboy's pearl and Matt's pearl look pretty simlar to me...both are deeply inserted.......

I'm not saying they are the same watch, maybe they are, but the pearls look similar...

newsboy · 30 June 2012, 10:59 PM

Hi Guys
The insert was mentioned in the Advert. It's not like I'm trying to hide something.
The watch has been appraised by Rolex so it's not a fake by no means.
Thanks

newsboy · 1 July 2012, 02:42 AM

The watch in the Link is a completely different watch
So please don't post unfounded information

Welshwatchman · 1 July 2012, 03:22 AM

That's inference for you.

He stated that he purchased from a member here so I checked all listings here for the period. I subsequently saw Matt's listing on TZ also.

Anyway, link deleted, sorry to bring you into it Matt

Now, it there ANYONE, bar Newsboy, who cares to call this insert genuine as Newsboy categorically states?

Preferably with a picture example so that the sharp eyes in this section can match up.

Otherwise there is a problem.

Welshwatchman · 1 July 2012, 03:35 AM

I can't find the original listing on TZ, searched back to May 2012.

newsboy · 1 July 2012, 06:35 PM

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=241606

onkyo · 2 July 2012, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newsboy

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=241606

Looking good...

30 June 2012, 10:20 AM	#1
Z-Sub 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: So Cal, USA Watch: Not a ONEWatch Man Posts: 7,383	What do you guys think about this Pearl on this sale item from TRF? I've never seen an authentic bezel insert with a pearl looking like this one. small, recessed pearl does not look right to me. the rest of the watch seems alright. http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=241325 __________________ SS Submariner Date "Z" SS SeaDweller "D" SS Submariner "Random" TT Blue Submariner "P" SS GMT-Master ll "M", Pepsi Pam 311, 524, 297

30 June 2012, 10:22 AM	#2
T-Rip "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2011 Real Name: Tom Location: Victorville CA Watch: Rolex DSSD 116660 Posts: 3,189	At looks really odd.. I'm wondering if it's just an aftermarket bezel? __________________ T-Rip Formally known as Haydendillon Rolex: DSSD 116660, 16622 PLATTY

30 June 2012, 10:45 AM	#3
STEELINOX 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Sink-O! Location: a praire in AZ Watch: ROLEX-less atm... Posts: 14,021	Yup. Looks lka imposter to me... The SEL sits a tad too shallow from the deck for my likin too... But thats just me __________________ *Positive Waves Baby* Lug Hole Loyalist / Chamfer Line Inspector INFORTHE WIN SUB-MAH-REEEN-ER ~ !

30 June 2012, 12:45 PM	#4
Ebruner "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Eddie Location: Kentucky Watch: 118208 Posts: 2,510	That pearl is pretty scary. From the photos it's hard to say much else about the watch though. -Eddie __________________

30 June 2012, 01:26 PM	#5
GradyPhilpott 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: New Mexico Watch: Seiko #SRK050 Posts: 34,460	The whole watch looks suspicious to me. __________________ JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner

30 June 2012, 03:27 PM	#6
onkyo Banned Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Pav Location: Manhattan Posts: 11,495	I have not seen a pearl look like that..... strange.

30 June 2012, 04:03 PM	#7
roach7 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Real Name: henry Location: nyc Watch: 16610lv Posts: 1,829	looks like an aftermarket insert.

30 June 2012, 08:12 PM	#9
Goiguidoc "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Real Name: Greg Location: Europe Watch: Rolex vintage Posts: 1,062	Very suspicious bezel insert! Never heard about this problem and never seen one like this.

30 June 2012, 08:32 PM	#10
mrbill2mrbill2 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Mr. Bill Location: South Florida Watch: 16610 Posts: 6,148	Funky bezel pearl and not a straight-on dial pic. Make this watch very questionable. __________________ Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of the Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons - ID # 13

30 June 2012, 09:03 PM	#11
Welshwatchman "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Paul Location: Wales, UK Posts: 14,578	Firstly, I have seen this member on other forums and he certainly seems to be in good standing everywhere. He mentions that he obtained the watch here and I've found the original posting. * not ** USA seller but seems certain to be the same watch. No pics or mention of the W.O.S receipt and papers, but he does mention irrelevancies such as a caseback sticker and cloth. Perhaps just a lazy seller. For me, the insert is wrong. I've spent the last five minutes comparing this insert with the face-on pic MK1 example on VRF as well as a 2004 F from a specialist who I'd trust with my cash all day long. The one here differs from the other two which are identical. The pip surround looks wrong, forget the pearl slippage. I've had my 16610 and 16610LV under a 20X loupe just now and both insert surrounds are different to the one in the pic. ... also the insert markers number font thickness and the 0s on the insert are wrong but bear in mind I am comparing directly to the "reference" on VRF only. Others can state if there is a further variation of the MK1 insert not referenced to on VRF. Please don't post here unless you have a concrete view. No "seems" posts padding this thread out more than it needs but collectors with a good eye are welcome to state their view. Should it transpire that the insert is wrong then the original seller should make amends with Newboy and the watch be de-listed here until a proper insert is fitted. I've asked MAtt Wu, the original seller, for additional information. Last edited by Welshwatchman; 1 July 2012 at 03:18 AM..

1 July 2012, 03:26 AM	#14
azguy Banned Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: ------- Location: ------- Watch: --------- Posts: 12,609	am I missing something, as newsboy's pearl and Matt's pearl look pretty simlar to me...both are deeply inserted....... I'm not saying they are the same watch, maybe they are, but the pearls look similar...

30 June 2012, 10:59 PM	#15
newsboy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: UK Watch: SS White Daytona Posts: 1,060	Hi Guys The insert was mentioned in the Advert. It's not like I'm trying to hide something. The watch has been appraised by Rolex so it's not a fake by no means. Thanks

1 July 2012, 02:42 AM	#16
newsboy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: UK Watch: SS White Daytona Posts: 1,060	The watch in the Link is a completely different watch So please don't post unfounded information

1 July 2012, 03:22 AM	#17
Welshwatchman "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Paul Location: Wales, UK Posts: 14,578	That's inference for you. He stated that he purchased from a member here so I checked all listings here for the period. I subsequently saw Matt's listing on TZ also. Anyway, link deleted, sorry to bring you into it Matt Now, it there ANYONE, bar Newsboy, who cares to call this insert genuine as Newsboy categorically states? Preferably with a picture example so that the sharp eyes in this section can match up. Otherwise there is a problem.

1 July 2012, 03:35 AM	#18
Welshwatchman "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Paul Location: Wales, UK Posts: 14,578	I can't find the original listing on TZ, searched back to May 2012.

1 July 2012, 06:35 PM	#19
newsboy "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: UK Watch: SS White Daytona Posts: 1,060	http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=241606

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