Mark I dial ?

[nigelUK]

This 1680 is being sold as 1978 / 583*** serial & Mark I dial.

However, I'm not sure it's Mark I ? The L doesn't look exactly central to crown to me. Also, I thought 583**** serial was 1977.

This Rolex vintage thing is a lifes work ! How do you manage to have a normal work life ?

photos are a bit crap sorry . .

[Haywood_Milton]

It isn't a Mark 1 or Mark 2 . . .

http://www.miltonaires.com/4499/two-...ate-submariner

Haywood

[nigelUK]

Lots of photos used for reference are taken down because of photobucket

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by nigelUK

Lots of photos used for reference are taken down because of photobucket

After a few years most of the gaps will have been closed again one way or another. In the meantime there are plenty of standalone articles on websites as above or in forum posts that do not rely on photobucket which can assist.

H

[stevedssd]

Great link and article by Milton to the Mk1 and Mk2 for comparison

Hopefully below is a side by side of a Mk1 on the left and Mk 3 on the right. They were both made by Lemrich and so are very similar, the Mk2 being made by Beyeler and with a different Coronet.

The most obvious differences apart from a centred L on a Mk 1 and Left of Centre L on a Mk 3 below the Coronet; is the F in ft and the shape of the 66's.

[nigelUK]

Correct me if I'm wrong then . . . but it is a Mark III ?

[rootbeer7]

wrong reference!!

[stevedssd]

Originally Posted by nigelUK

Correct me if I'm wrong then . . . but it is a Mark III ?

[nigelUK]

Originally Posted by stevedssd

Thanks Steve . . . . & Milton

While we are on the subject . . Do you think it looks a good piece ?

[nigelUK]

Originally Posted by nigelUK

Thanks Steve . . . . & Milton

While we are on the subject . . Do you think it looks a good piece ?

sorry 'Haywood' !

[Tom1675]

Also,the idea of a precise serial to vintage yr. is an impossible task. You can get an idea of things from the caseback/serial threads on this forum though.

[schaumburgla]

Originally Posted by nigelUK

Thanks Steve . . . . & Milton

While we are on the subject . . Do you think it looks a good piece ?

It looks to me like a very nice example. Case appears to be strong with uniform lugs. Dial & hands have a nice matching patina, has a nice FF insert with pearl intact. I can't see any issues from your pics that would deter me from a sale. Looks like a 1680 I'd be pleased too own.
Best of luck

Justin

[stevedssd]

Originally Posted by nigelUK

sorry 'Haywood' !

So am I Haywood !!

[stevedssd]

Originally Posted by schaumburgla

It looks to me like a very nice example. Case appears to be strong with uniform lugs. Dial & hands have a nice matching patina, has a nice FF insert with pearl intact. I can't see any issues from your pics that would deter me from a sale. Looks like a 1680 I'd be pleased too own.
Best of luck

Justin

Completely agree

[mattedialdoc]

Does that insert have a pearl within a metal cup surround?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Fredrik]

The pearl in the insert is indeed wrong for a 1680. The metal surround came later. It should not have that and it has been replaced with the wrong type.

[nigelUK]

[QUOTE=mattedialdoc;7912309]Does that insert have a pearl within a metal cup surround?


well spotted (& Fredrik) ... nice to be aware of these things even if its not something that would put me off going for this one

[sensui]

Watch looks great IMO even with the pearl being wrong. Thanks again for the education from Haywood/stevedssd (and springer from the other thread). After the mistake I made identifying the 1680 dial in the other thread, I looked at this website and it still has all the pictures in tact comparing different dial variations along with the service dial to show the coronet difference....needed a refresher since I own a mk1 1680 also. Thanks again gang for providing great info.

http://watchblog.dk/rolex1680.html

[BrazenC5]

[QUOTE=nigelUK;7912504]

Originally Posted by mattedialdoc

Does that insert have a pearl within a metal cup surround?


well spotted (& Fredrik) ... nice to be aware of these things even if its not something that would put me off going for this one

It may be a period correct (or even original) tritium pearl. Alot of them are transparent at the edge and give an appearance of a metal surround in pictures when in fact there isn't a surround (as in my pic below), but still would be good to confirm with the seller...but I believe it to be without the surround. Would be a brighter silver.

20170630_165003 (634x590).jpg

[Fredrik]

[QUOTE=BrazenC5;7915886]

Originally Posted by nigelUK

It may be a period correct (or even original) tritium pearl. Alot of them are transparent at the edge and give an appearance of a metal surround in pictures when in fact there isn't a surround (as in my pic below), but still would be good to confirm with the seller...but I believe it to be without the surround. Would be a brighter silver.

If you look at the second picture it is clear that it in fact has a metal surround. I think they might have mounted a 16800 pearl in the original insert and actually drilling it to make it fit. This is strange to me since 1680 pearls are still available from RSC, but nowadays they are luminova.