The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Vintage Rolex Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 2 March 2016, 09:29 PM   #1
azegami156
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: LONDON
Posts: 8
Case condition of 1967 1675

I was wondering what people thought about the condition of the case of this 1967 GMT. Has this been over-polished? The lug holes are touching the bevelled edge particularly the one adjacent to the upper crown guard. I have read somewhere that the bevels of 60s sports models can be quite pronounced and for this reason it can become very close to the lug holes. I would really appreciate it if someone could give me some opinion on this please.
Kind regards
Attached Images
     
azegami156 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 March 2016, 10:46 PM   #2
HL65
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
HL65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Ken
Location: SW Florida
Watch: One on my wrist.
Posts: 64,006
Watch case has been refinished and I can guess who did the work...
__________________

SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT
HL65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 12:45 AM   #3
redfred
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: newcastle
Posts: 342
Here's a 66 unpolished example - judge for yourself.

redfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 01:21 AM   #4
offrdmania
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
offrdmania's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Real Name: Matt
Location: Wine Country, Ca
Posts: 5,998
Those bevels are hideous! They arent even symmetrical
__________________
TRF Member 11738
offrdmania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 02:02 AM   #5
theflywrist
"TRF" Member
 
theflywrist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Stratosphere
Posts: 1,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfred View Post
Here's a 66 unpolished example - judge for yourself.

No no no!
You don't get to show us the side profile only!
More pice please!!!!
theflywrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 02:37 AM   #6
Miami Manny
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 43
There was a member on here who bought a GMT with Fuchsia bezel about a year ago and paid $9800 when they were selling for about $7500 complete. I thought he was a fool to overpay by so much. Now, just one year later, people are actually getting $9800 for Long E, Mark I dials on GMT's with Fuchsia bezel inserts.

This watch without the insert wouldn't be worth 7k to me. With the insert perhaps its worth 8500-9k. At 10.3 it is significantly overpriced and as others have already stated it has been refinished. I don't think they did a horrendous job but, perhaps the lugs were a bit thin to attempt such an aggressive chamfer cut.

My opinion.
Miami Manny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 03:48 AM   #7
05carbondrz
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 2,030
Looks like a ABC refinish job to me,I personally can't stand refinished Cases.
05carbondrz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 03:59 AM   #8
Miami Manny
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 43
Personally I hate refinished cases as well but, I can tell you from experience that 80% of customers who buy watches from me and my other dealer buddies want refinished cases. Its money well spent because more people want refinished than not.
Miami Manny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 04:21 AM   #9
redfred
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: newcastle
Posts: 342
Quote:
Originally Posted by theflywrist View Post
No no no!
You don't get to show us the side profile only!
More pice please!!!!
Here you go.



redfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 04:56 AM   #10
05carbondrz
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 2,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Manny View Post
Personally I hate refinished cases as well but, I can tell you from experience that 80% of customers who buy watches from me and my other dealer buddies want refinished cases. Its money well spent because more people want refinished than not.
I bet most would prefer a truly unpolished Case though.
05carbondrz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 05:00 AM   #11
lee fowler
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
lee fowler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Watch: GMT
Posts: 2,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfred View Post
Here you go.



OMG that is awesome.
__________________


Instagram: @lee1563
lee fowler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 05:50 AM   #12
1675-David
"TRF" Member
 
1675-David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 6,061
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfred View Post
Here you go.



So sexy
1675-David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 05:57 AM   #13
datejust24
"TRF" Member
 
datejust24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: Chris
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Watch: Rolexssss
Posts: 3,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfred View Post
Here you go.



I commented on your superb example 1675 yesterday and that was before I knew you had the full set...that may be one of the most pristine examples of a gilt 1675 I've ever seen on TRF...speechless my friend....you are one very very lucky man.
datejust24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 06:15 AM   #14
redfred
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: newcastle
Posts: 342
Quote:
Originally Posted by datejust24 View Post
I commented on your superb example 1675 yesterday and that was before I knew you had the full set...that may be one of the most pristine examples of a gilt 1675 I've ever seen on TRF...speechless my friend....you are one very very lucky man.
Thank you, it has an interesting history, its first owner passed away shortly after buying it and it went to his sister who left it in a draw in its box for 40+ years before being sold to the dealer that I purchased it from. The most surprising thing about it is the bracelet, its an expanding link 6636 and apart from being immaculate it is actually quite stiff as well as being correctly date stamped!
redfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:12 AM   #15
Miami Manny
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 43
Is anyone going to address the paperwork in Redfreds photo?
Miami Manny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:15 AM   #16
brandrea
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Manny View Post
Is anyone going to address the paperwork in Redfreds photo?
What are we addressing?
brandrea is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:18 AM   #17
redfred
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: newcastle
Posts: 342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Manny View Post
Is anyone going to address the paperwork in Redfreds photo?
??? Paperwork as far as i am aware is legit, it is from Rolex Bexley UK and detailed on its one and only service at Bexley, from memory cost about £10.25p. Or are you seeing something I am not?
redfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:32 AM   #18
Miami Manny
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 43
I see a Rolex model 1015 on the papers. Maybe the Bexley paperwork shows the watch as a 1675? I would like to see that...
Miami Manny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:39 AM   #19
brandrea
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Manny View Post
I see a Rolex model 1015 on the papers. Maybe the Bexley paperwork shows the watch as a 1675? I would like to see that...
I believe that might be a catalogue reference number. The model is blank on the paperwork. Just my opinion.
brandrea is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:45 AM   #20
Michael M.
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Posts: 8,391
It is not uncommon for paperwork from the 1960's to have been marked with the inventory number of the watch versus the serial/reference number. The papers above do appear to be correct. Not sure what all the fuss is about!

Also, I'm assuming the 1.4mil serial stamped on the top of the guarantee is the serial number?
Michael M. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:46 AM   #21
redfred
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: newcastle
Posts: 342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Manny View Post
I see a Rolex model 1015 on the papers. Maybe the Bexley paperwork shows the watch as a 1675? I would like to see that...
Ah no, that is their catalogue reference no. not model no. it also gives the bracelet no., at the top is stamped the serial no. There is also another number L.514 which I do not think you can see in that shot but that is also quoted on the 1971 service papers. I have seen this query brought up before on VRF and from what I can remember 1015 is traceable back to 1675 within their catologues.
redfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:46 AM   #22
Miami Manny
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 43
Bexley paper says Stainless Steel Rolex Oyster... Cant make out the rest of it.

If the Bexley paperwork doesnt mention a 1675 then I know it isn't proper and even if it does I would say that the printed serial on the top of the booklet was added after the fact and isn't original to the 1675. Too much of a coincidence to be a catalog reference number that exactly matches a model in the exact same production year.

If it said 1680 or 6265 none of us would think for s a second it was a catalog reference number but, because it isn't a sport model we brush it off :)

Even the printed numbers 146XXX on the booklet are crooked.

I don't like it and would love to see the rest of the paperwork..
Miami Manny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:55 AM   #23
Michael M.
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Newport Beach, CA
Posts: 8,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Manny View Post
Bexley paper says Stainless Steel Rolex Oyster... Cant make out the rest of it.

If the Bexley paperwork doesnt mention a 1675 then I know it isn't proper and even if it does I would say that the printed serial on the top of the booklet was added after the fact and isn't original to the 1675. Too much of a coincidence to be a catalog reference number that exactly matches a model in the exact same production year.

If it said 1680 or 6265 none of us would think for s a second it was a catalog reference number but, because it isn't a sport model we brush it off :)

Even the printed numbers 146XXX on the booklet are crooked.

I don't like it and would love to see the rest of the paperwork..
So you're saying a crooked stamp means that the serial has been added?
Interesting...
Michael M. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:58 AM   #24
Vincent65
"TRF" Member
 
Vincent65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Manny View Post
There was a member on here who bought a GMT with Fuchsia bezel about a year ago and paid $9800 when they were selling for about $7500 complete. I thought he was a fool to overpay by so much. Now, just one year later, people are actually getting $9800 for Long E, Mark I dials on GMT's with Fuchsia bezel inserts.

This watch without the insert wouldn't be worth 7k to me. With the insert perhaps its worth 8500-9k. At 10.3 it is significantly overpriced and as others have already stated it has been refinished. I don't think they did a horrendous job but, perhaps the lugs were a bit thin to attempt such an aggressive chamfer cut.

My opinion.
I don't recall seeing any good MKI/fuchsia GMTs for $7,500 a year ago, let alone 'complete' (do you mean full sets?)
__________________
https://www.rolexforums.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=80782&dateline=139659  8629
Vincent65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 07:58 AM   #25
Miami Manny
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 43
I'm saying a black rubber ink stamp on a 1967 watch isn't normal and something I have seen often if ever. Add to that the numbers are crooked and do not appear to be from a vintage stamp and I don't think it is genuine.

It is also a darker and different shade of black ink from the Dealer stamp on the bottom. For these reasons I do not feel the serial stamp is genuine or that the booklet is for a 1675 GMT.

A photo of the other supporting paperwork will go a long way in determining if it is or not.
Miami Manny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 08:01 AM   #26
Miami Manny
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Miami
Posts: 43
Vincent: No full sets. Fuchsia inserts on mark I's were selling for about 7500-8000 and then one forum member stepped up and paid $9800 for his from Jacek.

After that it set a baseline for pricing and the prices for these Mark I's with fuchsia's have seen a remarkable price increase that has now caught up to the original high price paid.

Point I am making is that with vintage even if you pay more for something you like now and "overpay" chances are that the market will continue to rise and will ultimately catch up with the price you paid. Doesnt mean you didn't overpay, just means that prices keep rising.
Miami Manny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 08:04 AM   #27
rollee1
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Real Name: Rollee
Location: Boston
Watch: it watching me
Posts: 1,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by redfred View Post
Here you go.



I am moved to tears, she's simply perfect.
__________________
Time you enjoy wasting was not wasted
rollee1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 08:16 AM   #28
Vincent65
"TRF" Member
 
Vincent65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,298
Manny - If you say so!
__________________
https://www.rolexforums.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=80782&dateline=139659  8629
Vincent65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 08:28 AM   #29
lee fowler
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
lee fowler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Watch: GMT
Posts: 2,559
This should answer the 1015 reference it is from a 1968 UK Catalogue and look at the price!! Also my one owner 1675 has 1015/6636 on the paperwork as well and is also hand written.
Attached Images
 
__________________


Instagram: @lee1563
lee fowler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2016, 08:43 AM   #30
Vincent65
"TRF" Member
 
Vincent65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee fowler View Post
This should answer the 1015 reference it is from a 1968 UK Catalogue and look at the price!! ���� Also my one owner 1675 has 1015/6636 on the paperwork as well and is also hand written.
Excellent - well done! Now let's see what happens...
__________________
https://www.rolexforums.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=80782&dateline=139659  8629
Vincent65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches

OCWatches

Asset Appeal

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.