1972 Rolex GMT 1675 MK2

[jlushing]

Wanted to share my latest find. This was found by an estate jeweler friend of mine who got it from the original owner’s wife. Never serviced, polished, or anything from what I can see - plenty of experts who can prob say differently. I am assuming it sat in a drawer or safe for a long time with the condition of the insert (Red back). Thanks for looking!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jlushing]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[othertbone]

Still has the chamfers! How is the bezel insert so pristine?

[jlushing]

Originally Posted by othertbone

Still has the chamfers! How is the bezel insert so pristine?

Who knows! I literally think it was worn for a year and put away.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by jlushing

Who knows! I literally think it was worn for a year and put away.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice example and I think you are right, "worn for a year..."

[othertbone]

Originally Posted by jlushing

Who knows! I literally think it was worn for a year and put away.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow now it looks like Marlon Brando's GMT without the bezel in Apocalypse Now! Check out IDGuys recent vid on Youtube about this. He does amazing work!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHbRYTjoghc

[btinl]

Nice one!

[Dan S]

great find.

[TimeLord2]

I do like that, very much. Just as an observation, I do wonder about the insert given the amount of wear on the lug just below and the chips out of the crystal above. The insert doesn't seem to share the same amount of wear and I would expect a chip or two out of the insert given the chips and scrapes on the crystal and lugs. That, and the scrapes on the rotating bezel at about the "4". Also, no fade or discoloration of the colors, I do find that strange on a watch of this age, unless the original owner was a vampire and wore short sleeve shirts all the time... Clearly it was worn, and worn like it should be. All of that said I like the bezel, it's clearly a fat font unit, and a nice one at that. I am no expert by far but the only thing that stands out to me is the insert. The patina is very nice on the lume dots, and I do think it is a beautiful GMT!
Had to look at it again, and it does have a fade, so maybe it was worn on the right hand but I would still expect some damage.

[roh123]

Great looking watch. Congrats

Insert is later in my opinion. Still super pretty of course.

[Tom1675]

Nice find, congrats!

[mineral]

Congrats and the unpolished case is collector dream for the Gmt at this age. Nice find.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[springer]

Very nice GMT - congratulations. I found the comments regarding the bezel insert from members of the TRF Detective Bureau quite interesting and entertaining to say the least.

[roh123]

Originally Posted by springer

Very nice GMT - congratulations. I found the comments regarding the bezel insert from members of the TRF Detective Bureau quite interesting and entertaining to say the least.

Feel free to share your knowledge.

[springer]

Originally Posted by roh123

Feel free to share your knowledge.

How about this - just because it's not scratched or dinged doesn't mean it has been replaced.

Since you called it incorrect - share your knowledge.

[cowboy music]

It looks like the insert has faded to fuchsia between 12 and 18 but not between 6 and 12? Is that so, or is it just the picture? I've never seen one partially fade like that. Would love to see a straight on shot if possible.

[roh123]

Originally Posted by springer

How about this - just because it's not scratched or dinged doesn't mean it has been replaced.

Since you called it incorrect - share your knowledge.

Sure. I am happy to share my experience and thoughts.

I would expect the early 70’s inserts to be what we often call super fat font. Not because of the font necessarily but more to the colors that more often were a bit dull and dark. Or more like those that came after the gilt era small triangle inserts which often still faded towards a more vivid orange.

Looking at our friend John’s pretty GMT. This is more what I would expect.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bzu7hQKnt7k/

The insert on this specific GMT is more mid, to late 70’s in my opinion. Like this one:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BjKdhalHF3x/

Both watches feel honest and correct for their era. I think mine was a 5m from 1978.

I didn’t mean to bash the thread starters watch. It is stunning. Only reason for my comment on the insert was as it was discussed above.

[jlushing]

Originally Posted by cowboy music

It looks like the insert has faded to fuchsia between 12 and 18 but not between 6 and 12? Is that so, or is it just the picture? I've never seen one partially fade like that. Would love to see a straight on shot if possible.

Here you go folks. It’s currently at the doctor getting serviced but I have this shot. I would be very very surprised if that’s a “later insert”. This is not from a sophisticated collector or dealer (purchased from). It was an old lady’s husband’s watch who had a local watch repair guy sell it for her. Watch repair guy does not collect or specialize in vintage, just knew it was a good piece but didn’t know the difference between red or blue back and just knew it was completely original. People in here are far more knowledge than me with picking apart a claimed original piece, so interested in the feedback with knowledge backed claims.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeLord2]

Originally Posted by springer

Very nice GMT - congratulations. I found the comments regarding the bezel insert from members of the TRF Detective Bureau quite interesting and entertaining to say the least.

Hahahahaha! I believe that was my 4th beer talking, not me… Probably shouldn't drink and forum.

[shaunylw]

Originally Posted by jlushing

Wanted to share my latest find. This was found by an estate jeweler friend of mine who got it from the original owner’s wife. Never serviced, polished, or anything from what I can see - plenty of experts who can prob say differently. I am assuming it sat in a drawer or safe for a long time with the condition of the insert (Red back). Thanks for looking!
Attachment 1070045



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hell of a find. What a perfect example!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lee fowler]

Looks to be a very nice original 1675 and a stunning example, big congrats.

[springer]

Originally Posted by jlushing

Here you go folks. It’s currently at the doctor getting serviced but I have this shot. I would be very very surprised if that’s a “later insert”. This is not from a sophisticated collector or dealer (purchased from). It was an old lady’s husband’s watch who had a local watch repair guy sell it for her. Watch repair guy does not collect or specialize in vintage, just knew it was a good piece but didn’t know the difference between red or blue back and just knew it was completely original. People in here are far more knowledge than me with picking apart a claimed original piece, so interested in the feedback with knowledge backed claims.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would be surprised if your insert was not original. No one can say for sure that it was changed except for the person that would have changed it out if that was indeed the case.

Mark II dials were used up through the 3 million serial numbered range which places them up to 1973 and maybe later.

Not all Mark IIs had super fat font inserts, and the ones that did were found in the very early 1970-71 range up to maybe 1972. Many Mark IIs had them same fonts as found on your insert. Additionally, not all inserts fade to the same colors or in the same manner due to limited exposure to UV light.

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

Hahahahaha! I believe that was my 4th beer talking, not me… Probably shouldn't drink and forum.

You wrote that eloquent, measured critique while drunk?

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by springer

I would be surprised if your insert was not original. No one can say for sure that it was changed except for the person that would have changed it out if that was indeed the case.

Mark II dials were used up through the 3 million serial numbered range which places them up to 1973 and maybe later.

Not all Mark IIs had super fat font inserts, and the ones that did were found in the very early 1970-71 range up to maybe 1972. Many Mark IIs had them same fonts as found on your insert. Additionally, not all inserts fade to the same colors or in the same manner due to limited exposure to UV light.

I agree. There is no subjective test to tell this inserts age based on image.

[roh123]

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

I agree. There is no subjective test to tell this inserts age based on image.

What you can do is an assessment of the overall look and feel of untouched watches from different periods. This usually helps a lot to understand what is what. I am not saying I necessarily need to be correct but if you look at enough great examples that you feel aren’t cobbled with you build experience. I think this goes for many of us that have handled volumes of watches in hand.

I see something and someone else sees something elde. That is perfectly fine. It is not a contest and as long as we share our views, knowledge and experience; hopefully it leads to progress. Right?

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by roh123

What you can do is an assessment of the overall look and feel of untouched watches from different periods. This usually helps a lot to understand what is what. I am not saying I necessarily need to be correct but if you look at enough great examples that you feel aren’t cobbled with you build experience. I think this goes for many of us that have handled volumes of watches in hand.

I see something and someone else sees something elde. That is perfectly fine. It is not a contest and as long as we share our views, knowledge and experience; hopefully it leads to progress. Right?

Yes, and then by that token - the premise of only identifying the generation the insert can be the only question; but as to wether its condition is A or B is moot and really of no consequence so long as your query pertains to identification - then you have a path to learn. And all else is subjective and inconsequential UNLESS you have an interest in the piece.

Thanks,
Randy

[roh123]

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

Yes, and then by that token - the premise of only identifying the generation the insert can be the only question; but as to wether its condition is A or B is moot and really of no consequence so long as your query pertains to identification - then you have a path to learn. And all else is subjective and inconsequential UNLESS you have an interest in the piece.

Thanks,
Randy

I didn’t do my statement based on the inserts condition. I did it by the font, color and usual aging on inserts usually found on mk2 1675’s from the early 70’s.

I’d be happy to see other, seemingly untouched examples from this era with a similar insert. My guess is that this watch received a new insert during an early service in the late 70’s. An analogy that would still correlate with the story that this watch since have spent most of its time in a drawer somewhere.

It is not an issue at all if someone took it that way.