Rolex 1655 " the Steve McQueen" Orange Hand Explorer II

[KellyM3]

Thank you to those who agreed or disagreed without resorting to personal attacks, and Justin, I told him that it was a great watch in my 2nd or 3rd post, and i hope he does enjoy his 1655. It is one of the coolest watches Rolex has ever made in my opinion, and it is one of the few vintage models I have not had the pleasure of owning, but, hope to do so some day.

[pngates]

Originally Posted by KellyM3

Oh, and by the way, lest you think I'm stupid, I have read every published biography on Mr. McQueen, the autobiographies of all three of his wives, "McQueen's Machines," viewed most, if not every published interview with him, have viewed most, if not every published photo of him, including the Life Magazine photos released 2-3 years ago that were previously unpublished, as well as numerous interviews with friends and family.

Not one person can identify who allegedly stated or confirmed that a 1655 "was his daily watch" other than auction house personnel and retailers, who started the rumor in the late 1990s early 2000s. Based on nothing. Not one person can be identified as having seen him wear one, non one article with anyone who has a scintilla of personal knowledge of him wearing one, and not one single photograph of him wearing one, only a handful of generic and unsubstantiated statements based on nothing.

This is not a nickname ie. the Batman or the Hulk, or "bluesy"which do not exist and are just nicknames, this is an attempt to link a watch to a specific individual, to increase the value, artificially and arguably, fraudulently. It is based on nothing. Period.

OH. You're right.

[pngates]

Originally Posted by KellyM3

Thank you to those who agreed or disagreed without resorting to personal attacks, and Justin, I told him that it was a great watch in my 2nd or 3rd post, and i hope he does enjoy his 1655. It is one of the coolest watches Rolex has ever made in my opinion, and it is one of the few vintage models I have not had the pleasure of owning, but, hope to do so some day.

That's fine I dont know why it had to turn into the Fred Flinstone? I guess if you hope to own one some day you'll have a Fred Flinstone all to yourself. Hopefully you dont post a picture of it and get bashed on the internet for using a nickname very commonly used. You're right he never wore one. You win.

[SUBversive]

Looks like op and Kelly are making up. Their first internet fight ...

Truth in advertising wins out?

Now I'll take off my steve McQueen slippers and go to bed.

[pngates]

Originally Posted by SUBversive

Looks like op and Kelly are making up. Their first internet fight ...

Truth in advertising wins out?

Now I'll take off my steve McQueen slippers and go to bed.

I dont want to fight about something so trivial. I'm not on here to upset people over a nickname. Honestly I'm only on here to enjoy other peoples timepieces and to share the love I have for my own with others who share the same passion as myself. And I feel as though my intelligence is insulted when people claim that I don't know what I'm talking about or that I make things up. I'm simply using a nickname given to a timepiece it has nothing to do with my intelligence, I'm not a sexist, or anything else people might be able to come up with. SORRY I SAID THE GREAT STEVE MCQUEENS NAME IN VEIN.

[SUBversive]

[LCDR]

I think the Explorer is the classic Search and Rescue watch. The hour hand in Orange and the orange strap make it the ultimate SAR watch to me.

My next grail is the Ex2, black dial, orange Rubber B strap.

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by SUBversive

Looks like op and Kelly are making up. Their first internet fight ...

Truth in advertising wins out?

Now I'll take off my steve McQueen slippers and go to bed.

Are they orange?

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by LCDR

I think the Explorer is the classic Search and Rescue watch. The hour hand in Orange and the orange strap make it the ultimate SAR watch to me.

My next grail is the Ex2, black dial, orange Rubber B strap.

Have you checked out the isoprane rubber strap?

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

Are they orange?

I'll have you know I paid extra for them ...

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by SUBversive

I'll have you know I paid extra for them ...

Unfortunate, because you were taken for a ride. Those are the Mark II frog feet slippers...

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

Unfortunate, because you were taken for a ride. Those are the Mark II frog feet slippers...

Ah but in my world Sir, they will always be forever and ever known as Steve McQueen slippers. Yes us rigid thinkers may overpay from time to time ...

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by SUBversive

Ah but in my world Sir, they will always be forever and ever known as Steve McQueen slippers. Yes us rigid thinkers may overpay from time to time ...

I admire your tenacity, good sir...

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

I admire your tenacity, good sir...

Very impressive collection. Great pics.

[amoredimamma]

Really a great watch; congratulations...

[classicwatchinc]

nice watch

[timnik]

It's a great watch.

I don't care what anyone calls it.

I want one now.

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by SUBversive

Very impressive collection. Great pics.

[pngates]

Originally Posted by timnik

It's a great watch.

I don't care what anyone calls it.

I want one now.

Thank you sir

[Storky]

Originally Posted by timnik

It's a great watch.

I don't care what anyone calls it.

Neither do I ... I have one too and love it!

[steptoe]

Originally Posted by KellyM3

Oh, and by the way, lest you think I'm stupid, I have read every published biography on Mr. McQueen, the autobiographies of all three of his wives, "McQueen's Machines," viewed most, if not every published interview with him, have viewed most, if not every published photo of him, including the Life Magazine photos released 2-3 years ago that were previously unpublished, as well as numerous interviews with friends and family.

Not one person can identify who allegedly stated or confirmed that a 1655 "was his daily watch" other than auction house personnel and retailers, who started the rumor in the late 1990s early 2000s. Based on nothing. Not one person can be identified as having seen him wear one, non one article with anyone who has a scintilla of personal knowledge of him wearing one, and not one single photograph of him wearing one, only a handful of generic and unsubstantiated statements based on nothing.

This is not a nickname ie. the Batman or the Hulk, or "bluesy"which do not exist and are just nicknames, this is an attempt to link a watch to a specific individual, to increase the value, artificially and arguably, fraudulently. It is based on nothing. Period.

If you got out a bit more and mixed with people face to face it may help you to relax, lighten up and not take things you can't do anything about so seriously ..

Just saying.....

[SUBversive]

Originally Posted by steptoe

If you got out a bit more and mixed with people face to face it may help you to relax, lighten up and not take things you can't do anything about so seriously ..

Just saying.....

I thought this thread was well over cooked especially with personal attacks?

Just to sum up what I've read here.....

It's a myth, a lie a falsehood .... Used to increase sale price and constitutes false advertising. The lie keeps going and some defend the lie because they are rigid thinkers or bought that item at the inflated price or just don't care. The defenders say, what's the big deal? It's trivial ..... No true no false it's all a matter of opinion? If that's so why argue and attack Kelly s opinion? And attack the person stating the opinion?



IBTL

[KellyM3]

"Steptoe" you know nothing about my personal life, or my interactions, so, again, instead of addressing facts, you make some kind of personal attack about my social life, again, of which you know nothing.

And yes, it is something that I and others can "do something about." People on this forum opine about incorrect bezels, endlinks, bezel inserts, bracelets, dials, re-lume versus original indices, matte versus gloss dials, I see many people send in pictures asking about authenticity, whether watches are genuine, and the undercurrent to all of this is really, and the real query is whether the watch is what is is puported to be. I see people in the know to tell them to stay away from watches due to improprieties, fakes, "frankenwatches," or to be wary as the endlinks are wrong, or that the insert is wrong, and significantly, the dial is incorrect or a service dial. And many are told to stay away from the watch or wait for another one to come up for sale, because the watch is not what it is purported to be. And those of you who continue to call the 1655 the "Steve McQueen" watch something that it is not, are doing the same exact thing. Why bother with all these technicalities about condition, original parts, worrying about polishing versus non-polished, correct insert or not, because nothing matters if we aren't truthful and at least as accurate as possible in describing the watch.

And to the OP, perhaps it was not clear, but, the Fred Flinstone thing was the injection of humor to try to hit home the point, which was clearly missed, it may as well be called a Fred Flinstone watch, or by anyone else's name for that matter who didn't wear the 1655, because neither that cartoon character nor Steve McQueen wore the watch.

And quite frankly, I do not follow the herd mentality, and thankfully, many people in the world do not. If we did, we would all still think the world was flat, because for centuries, that is "just the way it was...the world is flat..." So using your mentality that "that is just the way it is and always will be" if adopted by everyone in the world, would mean that nothing was ever questioned and we would remain in permanent stagnation.

Changes, whether social, factual, or otherwise all need to start somewhere, so those of us that do not like the watch being misrepresented as something it is not will hopefully have some impact until the misrepresentations stop. And change doesn't happen overnight.

Your personal attack on me does not change the fact that the watch is not a "Steve McQueen" watch.

[Vincent65]

"KellyM3"

But you do NEED to lighten up, seriously!

We all get it. It's you that's missing the point - repeatedly. We all know it's not a "S.M." watch; there is clearly no such thing. Even the Sub he wore doesn't bear his name, only a loose association amongst enthusiasts (as with the Heuer Monaco), along with millions of others (many notable/famous people) who wear them. It doesn't say 'Paul Newman' on a Daytona, either. The thread was not about this topic, but you jumped on it, and quite aggressively, or at least very sarcastically and dismissively, which you now maintain was humour. And then, when people respond in a similar tone which you have set, you're the victim...

It's a misnomer - we get it! It has nothing to do with dials, bezels or any component of a watch being original, or indeed in its entirety. A name of which you do not approve does not make it a fake watch.

Nor has it any bearing on the spherical nature of the rock which we inhabit, and you are implying that anyone who thinks you are taking this all a bit too seriously is merely 'following the herd', which, using your MO is a personal attack at which I should take offense, which I don't! It's ridiculous, and hilarious, and you just won't let it go, will you?

Bringing gender into the debate was right out of order, in my opinion, which you then tried to make some sort of 'political correctness' crusade, further alienating yourself, combined with being an alleged series of personal attacks on you, if someone didn't share your 'opinion'. No-one knew what gender you were until you decided to drop it on the discussion for dramatic effect. It carries none, in my view.

It's not a matter of opinion to agree or disagree with, either. The fact remains that the name stands, in its apparent, unproven incorrectness, however much of a devoted fan of Mr.McQueen you are. There's nothing to disagree with on that topic. It is what it is. Like it or leave it.

Cheers!

[QueueCumber]

I agree that people shouldn't call it the Steve McQueen Explorer, even if it has been called that for a long time already. OP meant no harm, was corrected, and I don't see why we can't move on already.

I also agree that bringing up the gender issue seemed completely irrelevant. I thought KellyM3 was a guy until she said she was a female. I guess that's just my personal bias based on my experience of the ratio of males to females on these types of fora. I assumed Kelly was a last name and that he drove an M3...

[Vincent65]

It seemed irrelevant because it is. It was a way to make the thread about the poster of the comment. Job done.

[CrownMe]

Originally Posted by Storky

Orange Hand - Just found our where the confusion comes from!
***Messing around on a Sunday ... apologies to anyone who may own the copyright to the 'original' photo!***

this is hilarious

[CrownMe]

Originally Posted by KellyM3

Well, one of you sent me a PM by mistake, so thank you for letting me in on what you are doing. You should make sure you are sending PM to the right person.

Secondly, I know you are trying to start a fight, likely to have me banned per the PM, so I will not take the bait.

There was no hijacking of anything. My "comments" are factually based. There are no pictures or any evidence anywhere, on the internet, or otherwise, that support your contention that this is a "Steve McQueen" watch. Unless you have proof that he owned your watch or wore it, your labeling it a "Steve McQueen" watch is false. Simply not true.

There is no support on the internet, or elsewhere, that he ever wore that model watch. So your contention that he wore that model is simply not factually correct, nor true.

I made no personal attacks upon you, your livelihood, your "collection" or anything related to you other than your incorrect designation. You, however, have chosen to make personal attacks upon me. I do note part of your personal attack is your suggestion, or should I say inference, that you are somehow superior because you either have, or believe that you have, a "collection that is somehow superior, or more plentiful, valuable or voluminous, to one that I may or may not have.

Now, you know nothing about me, or whether I have a "collection" or what I have in my "collection" nor do you know what kind of person I am. However, I do note that you and others continue to defend the identification of this watch and/or model in a completely incorrect and factually untrue way. It is no more a "Steve McQueen" watch than it is a Fred Flinstone watch. Just because you and other folks continue to say it is something that it is not, does not make it true, regardless of the number of times it is repeated. An untruth is an untruth, whether told once or a thousand times. I do note that you continue to argue in support of a contention that is not true, and that others are piling on in support of the person who is contending something that is not true, and condemning the person who has the factually valid position. Trumpeting this watch as a "McQueen" watch could be perceived as taking advantage of prospective purchasers who may see your post and others like it, who think that they are getting something related to Steve McQueen, which it is not. Since the truth clearly does not matter, anyone can call any item anything they so desire. And if it is repeated over and over, then it is ok. Sorry "bud" but, I do not conduct myself that way, on the internet, or in the real world. But, hey, that is just one person's way of living.

I do know what Fred would say about continuing to make these representations about it being a "McQueen" watch, he would say "Yabba Dabba Don't"

care to share this phantom Private message? would be interesting for sure

[Dunebug]

Well said Vincent65, a fair summing-up

[Storky]

Originally Posted by CrownMe

this is hilarious

Thanks, it's nice to have a bit of fun...eh?! Isn't that what it's all about?