ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

1175 · 26 February 2009, 12:08 PM

This one looks fishy to me. Description says 16660, but pictures are 1665. Claims to be original owner, but wouldn't the original owner know the difference? Not a lot of recent feedback.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLEX-SUBMARINER...1%7C240%3A1318

idk01 · 26 February 2009, 12:23 PM

Hi 1775,

Watch looks good, I do know one some older 1665's have Seadweller and under that Submariner with depth rating both in red, nicknamed a double red but not this one.

opinions from the SD experts??

Orchi · 26 February 2009, 02:48 PM

Err buddies...that is strange...
Here's the Seller's description again...

Up for auction is a rare 1980's ROLEX SUBMARINER SEA-DWELLER watch.

This watch is in 100% original, never been serviced.

ORIGINAL ROLEX DESIGN 16660 "

"STAINLESS STEEL. serial: 737XX "
This watch is excellent Sea-Dweller in all original condition. I am the only owner of this watch. The body lines are still flawless. Original tritium markers with matching hands showing very nice patina. The dial is pristine!. Original 93160 band with 529 solid end links. The movement is clean and is in perfect working order.

1. All pictures are showing the watch to be a Ref 1665...including having the correct Cal.1570 movement...

2. The Seller in this case...may have typed the wrong Model # n Serial # in the listing...

Nevertheless...to say that the watch is 100% Original...
could be a slight over-statement...

Originally Ref 1665 SD would come with 93150 Oyster Bracelet...instead of 93160/592(Ref 16660)...
Originally the correct End Links could be 285 or 385...depending on period of production...
By "7,3xx,xxx" series...
it should be EL# 585 for the last production series of this 1665 SD...
ending around 1981 or so.

Perhaps the Seller could be notified to have the necessary details...corrected.

26 February 2009, 12:08 PM	#1
1175 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: USA Posts: 44	Ebay Sea Dweller 16660 or 1665? This one looks fishy to me. Description says 16660, but pictures are 1665. Claims to be original owner, but wouldn't the original owner know the difference? Not a lot of recent feedback. http://cgi.ebay.com/ROLEX-SUBMARINER...1%7C240%3A1318

26 February 2009, 12:23 PM	#2
idk01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Dave Location: Australia Watch: DJ16233TT Posts: 18,485	Hi 1775, Watch looks good, I do know one some older 1665's have Seadweller and under that Submariner with depth rating both in red, nicknamed a double red but not this one. opinions from the SD experts?? __________________ *Apprentice to Terry Newton; Superstar and Fake Sleuth*

26 February 2009, 02:48 PM	#3
Orchi Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Malaysia Posts: 2,934	Err buddies...that is strange... Here's the Seller's description again... Up for auction is a rare 1980's ROLEX SUBMARINER SEA-DWELLER watch. This watch is in 100% original, never been serviced. ORIGINAL ROLEX DESIGN 16660 " "STAINLESS STEEL. serial: 737XX " This watch is excellent Sea-Dweller in all original condition. I am the only owner of this watch. The body lines are still flawless. Original tritium markers with matching hands showing very nice patina. The dial is pristine!. Original 93160 band with 529 solid end links. The movement is clean and is in perfect working order. 1. All pictures are showing the watch to be a Ref 1665...including having the correct Cal.1570 movement... 2. The Seller in this case...may have typed the wrong Model # n Serial # in the listing... Nevertheless...to say that the watch is 100% Original... could be a slight over-statement... Originally Ref 1665 SD would come with 93150 Oyster Bracelet...instead of 93160/592(Ref 16660)... Originally the correct End Links could be 285 or 385...depending on period of production... By "7,3xx,xxx" series... it should be EL# 585 for the last production series of this 1665 SD... ending around 1981 or so. Perhaps the Seller could be notified to have the necessary details...corrected.

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