ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
25 September 2014, 04:52 AM | #1 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Real Name: Aaron
Location: Calgary AB
Watch: Explorer II 42
Posts: 15
|
LV the real deal...?
Looking at a 16610LV and not being a Sub guy wanted to find out the obvious tells to authenticity, or not as the case may be. I came across a seemingly well written article but since that too came from the net I'd like to get some independant verification of it as well. Here is the key snippet from it I am questioning.
Quote:
I'd really like some positive yay or nay on this if possible. I'll add a few photos of the watch in question in a moment. The other issue on it I see is the brushing on the lugs. It could just be the lighting, but it looks poorly done and 'heavier' that typical of Rolex, and certainly WAY heavier than that of my Explorer II or even my Tudors. Quick edit: that snippet is from an ebay guide to spotting fake Subs on their site. |
|
25 September 2014, 04:55 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Real Name: Aaron
Location: Calgary AB
Watch: Explorer II 42
Posts: 15
|
I don't want to post the gentlemans ad publicly as I am not accusing him of anything and don't want to cause any issues where there may well not be one, but here are some photos from his listing.
|
25 September 2014, 06:37 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: David
Location: australia
Posts: 20,216
|
Watch looks ok
__________________
watches many |
25 September 2014, 06:49 AM | #4 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Florida
Posts: 16,736
|
While the pictures look good, and you are not posting the seller's post, it is easy to comment on the pictures and not the seller..
|
25 September 2014, 08:14 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Real Name: Aaron
Location: Calgary AB
Watch: Explorer II 42
Posts: 15
|
Stopped by one of my preferred AD's today and he happened t have a brand new LV that wasn't for sale and just part of the owners inventory/collection. It had the three ticks as well and clearly that one was legit so I'm much less concerned about this now.
The LV was stunning too, which is nice to at least be able to have a few minutes wrist time with one before an online transaction. Especially as I don't particularly care for subs. Strange I know. Appreciate the input guys. Thanks |
25 September 2014, 09:28 AM | #6 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2013
Real Name: Sayub
Location: UK, East Midlands
Watch: Rolex 116610LV
Posts: 423
|
Definitely Genuine!
|
25 September 2014, 12:04 PM | #7 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: chicago
Posts: 22
|
Occam's Razor applies here.
In short, the 'snippet' you relied upon as fact is just plain wrong. (At least it's wrong today.) There are a number of dial variations that apply to the 16610LV. Check THIS link for a bit more detailed info. |
25 September 2014, 03:03 PM | #8 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Seiko #SRK047
Posts: 34,460
|
The watch in those photos appears to be legitimate.
Nothing unusual pops out at all.
__________________
JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner |
26 September 2014, 04:15 AM | #9 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Japan
Watch: ing your back.
Posts: 16,179
|
What are your concerns if you don't mind me asking? Looks good.
|
26 September 2014, 06:50 AM | #10 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Real Name: Aaron
Location: Calgary AB
Watch: Explorer II 42
Posts: 15
|
Quote:
To the fellow just above, the concerns were the dial and case, and discrepancies in it with the article on fake LVs I had posted earlier. In any case this particular deal isn't going through so it is a moot point for this purchase; however I've learned a great amount about the piece in which to reference for future considerations. |
|
26 September 2014, 10:19 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2006
Real Name: Mike
Location: Tustin
Watch: LV Sub
Posts: 1,940
|
looks like the real mccoy...
__________________
116610 LN 116713 LN Instagram: rolexfan69 |
28 September 2014, 02:07 PM | #12 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Singapore
Posts: 59
|
Just curious where did you find the misleading snippet from? Could you share the link?
Quote:
|
|
28 September 2014, 05:04 PM | #13 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Eddie
Location: Australia
Watch: A few.
Posts: 37,533
|
It's an 'M' and the same dial as mine.
There is to much false information floating around on the web IMO.
__________________
E |
29 September 2014, 12:12 PM | #14 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Japan
Watch: ing your back.
Posts: 16,179
|
My M is three ticks also. 100% genuine.
|
30 September 2014, 05:50 PM | #15 | ||
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Real Name: Aaron
Location: Calgary AB
Watch: Explorer II 42
Posts: 15
|
Quote:
http://www.ebay.com/gds/How-To-Ident...3597900/g.html Complete article: Quote:
|
||
30 September 2014, 06:00 PM | #16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Real Name: Aaron
Location: Calgary AB
Watch: Explorer II 42
Posts: 15
|
Absolutely. That was in my first sentence of the original post, hence my suspicion of even the article on fakes. Practically anything found online needs some sort of independant verification. It is unfortunate, but it is what it is I suppose. Just have to take the best precautions one can.
|
30 September 2014, 07:42 PM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: South FL
Posts: 444
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.