Need advice on this 1680

[izolate]

Hi guys,
I am new for this forum as well as vintage rolex.
I am looking to buy a 1680 production in my birth year 1979 and come across this 1680 with serial 61xxxxx. Does this watch look ok for a buy? The claspe code is VE which is 1980. Is this normal? Or it should be VD only?
Thx in advance for the advice
Jo

[Styles Bitchley]

Slightly older bracelet is normal. I’m sure you’ve noted the corrosion on the hands and around the case back, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1665fan]

Depending on price patina is nice but hands are toast....

[dhknola]

I love it, would boil down to price. Hands do not bother me.

[OysterBracelet]

Hands are in a terrible condition, avoid.

[shaunylw]

Originally Posted by 1665fan

Depending on price patina is nice but hands are toast....

Agreed. I like keeping things all original but those hands need to be replaced.

[77T]

Originally Posted by Styles Bitchley

Slightly older bracelet is normal. I’m sure you’ve noted the corrosion on the hands and around the case back, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In his narrative it is the opposite - the clasp code indicated a newer bracelet compared to the watch s/n. But in general, these Internet lists aren’t the gospel according to Rolex.

The corrosion you noted is more important for long term condition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by shaunylw

Agreed. I like keeping things all original but those hands need to be replaced.

From what I can see in those pictures is the dial and hands not telling the same story.

Hands appear to have had water/moisture issue. Yet lume plots don’t indicate water/moisture. I would have expected some serious dark spots on the dial lume plots given the condition of those hands.

OP: I don’t think this example deserves any price premium. In fact it may be an assemblage from different watches.

Not saying it’s fake - just not organically natural - nor all original.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[izolate]

Thx for opinion, especially on the corrosion of he hand. I will keep looking then. Still have a lot to learn.

[izolate]

Originally Posted by 77T

In his narrative it is the opposite - the clasp code indicated a newer bracelet compared to the watch s/n. But in general, these Internet lists aren’t the gospel according to Rolex.

The corrosion you noted is more important for long term condition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yes, it got newer bracelet compared to the watch (according to the clasp code/production year information from various website)

Thx for the head up on hand corrosion issue.

[Styles Bitchley]

Originally Posted by 77T

In his narrative it is the opposite - the clasp code indicated a newer bracelet compared to the watch s/n. But in general, these Internet lists aren’t the gospel according to Rolex.

The corrosion you noted is more important for long term condition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Oops. I meant "newer!"

[springer]

VE (1980) clasp code is perfect for that serial number and is probably original.

(6.1 million serial is late 1979 to 1980.)

Ratty old hands doesn't necessarily indicate water damage - that era was notorious for hand issues. Personally, I would ditch the hands, original or not - they do nothing for the watch.