1680 Red double checking

[bayerische]

Hello guys,

I'm also posting here in the vintage section my "new" 1680 Red Submariner.

Just bought it from a reputable professional seller here in Finland, I've dealt with him many times, so no worries there.

However on another forum, someone found some parts of the dial suspicious. Yes, there was some serious confusion too, as some of the guys thought they where looking at a Mk4 dial, and this is definitely a Mk5 dial.

Anyhow, I'd appreciate if you could have a look over, and I'll happily provide more pics to the best of my ability.

Short info of the watch, it was sourced from a German collector to Finland.

It's a 3,1 million serial, 1680 Red Submariner with a MK5 (MKV) dial and MK3 (MKIII) bezel.

It has a strong case, although plenty of pitting on the usual places. (Between lugs, under the caseback)

Dial and hands as well as bezel are in a *Mint! condition, something I can figure might make some people suspicious for a 46 year old watch.

So, on to the pictures.

[yannis]

Lovely condition Andreas. I say enjoy it my friend! You have got a gem there. Case is also thick and although it may have had a light polish in the past it has been done properly and lightly as chamfers are still there. It is apparent this watch has not been worn much. Looking the business man!

[bayerische]

Thank you Yannis!

A few more daylight pics of the dial text.

[swish77]

Man, that looks like a beautiful example! Big congrats!

What were the “suspicions” on the other forum exactly? That the hands had been changed? (Not suggesting that. They look great, with matching patina.)

[roh123]

Comparing the fonts against the DRSD reference page the depth rating and SCOC text didn't line up as expected towards the Submariner text. Once realizing the Submariner text is slightly off center compared to the reference mk5 I believe most are convinced it is correct.



The pitting would be a dealmaker for me personally but it is not that uncommon on old watches.

[Kellokonttori]

There are several very close range serial number mkV watches on HQ Milton website with the same slightly off center = mark.

[thomaspp]

It looks fine to me so congrats. yes, the pitting is too bad. and it would be nice to get a pearl for it.

[bayerische]

Pitting is almost always there in 46 year old dive watches.

[roh123]

Originally Posted by bayerische

Pitting is almost always there in 46 year old dive watches.

No. That is not true. :)

[bayerische]

Originally Posted by roh123

No. That is not true. :)

Well in my experience, yes, more or less. It's dirt/water combination. Active dive watches usually have less, as they have been washed/rinsed regularly. It's usually sweat and dirt who is the culprit.

The pitting on this one looks much worse under the harsh lighting that I used to photograph with yesterday.

[southtexas]

Originally Posted by roh123

Comparing the fonts against the DRSD reference page the depth rating and SCOC text didn't line up as expected towards the Submariner text. Once realizing the Submariner text is slightly off center compared to the reference mk5 I believe most are convinced it is correct.



The pitting would be a dealmaker for me personally but it is not that uncommon on old watches.

Wow excellent catch. Let's rename that dial variation the Mark IV.5, or the Mark V.5. I'm not picky either way. Your watch is now worth $3k more than it was a few moments ago. You're welcome

[bayerische]

Originally Posted by southtexas

Wow excellent catch. Let's rename that dial variation the Mark IV.5, or the Mark V.5. I'm not picky either way. Your watch is now worth $3k more than it was a few moments ago. You're welcome

I like that!

[btinl]

Originally Posted by bayerische

Pitting is almost always there in 46 year old dive watches.

It happens, but I wouldn't say "almost always." I don't have any pitting on either of my red subs (Mk IV 1970, Mk II 1969).

Regardless, you have a nice looking red sub.

[bayerische]

Thank you Brad!