can someone confirm this watch? 1675 GMT

[Jimmy1989]

This watch is advertised as original. Can someone confirm that it is? Im very interested. James

uploadfromtaptalk1445960956312.jpg

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[Solicitor]

Looks ok to me except for the new hands and the watch looking too 'perfect'.

I personally wouldn't buy the watch unless I see it in the metal and the serial numbers in the lugs, bracelet, caseback and movement add up.

Good luck.

[TimeToGo]

What is the partial serial # to determine year of production?

Could be original, the dial could be appropriate for the year of production but not the insert.. If you can get more information..

[Pharmlou]

Insert is new, hands are newer than the dial, but replaced some time ago. Some more info would help. Most probably all work carried out by Rolex, so original parts but not original to the watch itself.

[chris333]

Bezel insert appears to be a (probably genuine) replacement.

People (sellers) need to learn the difference between "genuine" and "original".

[springer]

Originally Posted by chris333

Bezel insert appears to be a (probably genuine) replacement.

People (sellers) need to learn the difference between "genuine" and "original".

X2.

Sellers and dealers also need to quit advertising watches being correct that have the wrong boxes, booklets etc or watch parts to include : case backs, incorrect dials, inserts, bracelets etc. This is not just something that I have observed - I have heard these same comments and concerns from many others in the watch collecting community.