1675 watch is dated 1969, gmt booklet is 1970

[limym]

Hi there. May i ask for some advise in this. I would like to complete my 1675 set dated in January 1969. Is it advisable to purchase the green 1675 pamphlet that is dated 1970? I have been trying to complete the set and that is all it is left.

[limym]

I was offered the same piece with no date but in German. However this set is in English but dated 1970.

[lee fowler]

When was the watch sold and what is the serial number?

[limym]

Originally Posted by lee fowler

When was the watch sold and what is the serial number?

Hi. 1969. 2110xxx series

[lee fowler]

You need one dated 1968 to be correct.

[Woody]

Speaking from experience, a lot of these brochures are copies (particularly those available on e-bay). I would tread carefully or not bother at all.

[VintageVagabound]

Originally Posted by Woody

Speaking from experience, a lot of these brochures are copies (particularly those available on e-bay). I would tread carefully or not bother at all.

Agree. If the seller has more than one, it’s obviously a red flag. People will beat the copies up and make them look aged. In my experience the original aged booklets have a smell (musty? Certain ink?) that’s hard to replicate in copies

[lee fowler]

Originally Posted by VintageVagabound

Agree. If the seller has more than one, it’s obviously a red flag. People will beat the copies up and make them look aged. In my experience the original aged booklets have a smell (musty? Certain ink?) that’s hard to replicate in copies

The smell test is a good way of telling once in hand!

[limym]

thank you. however, with regards to the booklet. is it important to have it at all in terms of the value of the set?

[1665fan]

Originally Posted by limym

thank you. however, with regards to the booklet. is it important to have it at all in terms of the value of the set?

It’s still just a cobbled together set.....a booklet 1 year off isn’t going to help much or hurt it.....if fake it’s a waste of time and money

[Dan S]

For me, the vast majority of the value of any accessory items is in the original warranty papers that show the serial number and purchase info. That's the piece with the provenance. Everything else (boxes, booklets, etc.) is minor. Just speaking for myself.

[limym]

thank you for the advice. im still new to the vintage game. i guess i have an OCD on making sure the whole set is complete. but just alil pricey to make them right.

[swaini3]

Originally Posted by limym

thank you for the advice. im still new to the vintage game. i guess i have an OCD on making sure the whole set is complete. but just alil pricey to make them right.

Its nice to have the whole set. The trick is in sourcing genuine ones and the right ones. Many copies around and some are going for serious $$. As mentioned above, the main thing is to have the original warranty paper.

[springer]

If the case back is 1969, a 1970 manual is well within range for that year. Back then almost every set that I have seen was sold two to three years after the year stamped on the case back.

[springer]

Originally Posted by 1665fan

It’s still just a cobbled together set.....a booklet 1 year off isn’t going to help much or hurt it.....if fake it’s a waste of time and money

One year off based on what? Because it doesn't match 1968?

[zapokee]

I wouldn't bother with a cobbled-together set.

It would bug me because I know they're not the originals. An honest seller also can't present it as an original full set, which makes the full-set value zero.

[swish77]

I’d have no issues with that booklet, assuming it’s legit. These sets were put together by ADs at the time of sale, not when the watch was made and assembled at the Rolex factory. A year or two after wouldn’t be out of line.

As for collectors putting sets together after the fact, how is it any different than tracking down a correct, age-appropriate insert or dial decades later. I guess we could call those “cobbled-together” watches.

As long as the set/accessories are correct for the reference and the year stamps make sense, I’m good with it. Fun part of the hobby. And for anyone who doesn’t think it adds value, check out the prices for vintage Daytona, GMT and Sub manuals, for example. They’re insane, like most of the vintage Rolex world.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by springer

If the case back is 1969, a 1970 manual is well within range for that year. Back then almost every set that I have seen was sold two to three years after the year stamped on the case back.

Originally Posted by swish77

I’d have no issues with that booklet, assuming it’s legit. These sets were put together by ADs at the time of sale, not when the watch was made and assembled at the Rolex factory. A year or two after wouldn’t be out of line.

I think the OP is saying that the papers are dated January 1969, so that is the sale date. In which case, the dealer couldn't have included a 1970 manual. At least that is how I understood the OP.

[limym]

Originally Posted by Dan S

I think the OP is saying that the papers are dated January 1969, so that is the sale date. In which case, the dealer couldn't have included a 1970 manual. At least that is how I understood the OP.

Yes that is what I am asking about. Because the guarantee booklet is stamped on 1969. Hence having the pamphlet being 1970 seems wrong.

[limym]

Originally Posted by swish77

I’d have no issues with that booklet, assuming it’s legit. These sets were put together by ADs at the time of sale, not when the watch was made and assembled at the Rolex factory. A year or two after wouldn’t be out of line.

As for collectors putting sets together after the fact, how is it any different than tracking down a correct, age-appropriate insert or dial decades later. I guess we could call those “cobbled-together” watches.

As long as the set/accessories are correct for the reference and the year stamps make sense, I’m good with it. Fun part of the hobby. And for anyone who doesn’t think it adds value, check out the prices for vintage Daytona, GMT and Sub manuals, for example. They’re insane, like most of the vintage Rolex world.

Yes! That was why I was trying to find all of them. I guess it could be cobbled up. But isn't it the same when ADs sell it to us? If the guarantee booklet and punched papers are fake. Then it's a problem for sure. But I'm talking about the accessories..

[madgpol]

Originally Posted by zapokee

I wouldn't bother with a cobbled-together set.

It would bug me because I know they're not the originals. An honest seller also can't present it as an original full set, which makes the full-set value zero.

[limym]

Originally Posted by zapokee

I wouldn't bother with a cobbled-together set.

It would bug me because I know they're not the originals. An honest seller also can't present it as an original full set, which makes the full-set value zero.

but every other important items are original. just the tag and booklet that i am finding for myself. i wouldnt see it as the entire value being zero? thats alittle extreme to me

[lee fowler]

Originally Posted by springer

If the case back is 1969, a 1970 manual is well within range for that year. Back then almost every set that I have seen was sold two to three years after the year stamped on the case back.

The case back is stamped IV68 and the watch sold in Jan 1969!

[Pocosso]

To recognize a copy you have to magnify the printing pixellation, the original one must be very regular while the fakes are printed digitally so the pixels are random.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by Dan S

I think the OP is saying that the papers are dated January 1969, so that is the sale date. In which case, the dealer couldn't have included a 1970 manual. At least that is how I understood the OP.

Ah, didn’t realize there was a stamped/dated guarantee paper, and I agree that it would be odd to have a manual dated a year after the date of sale.

I still have no issue with putting together authentic sets for vintage Rolexes after the fact, same as tracking down original, age-appropriate watch parts. The year stamps of the manuals need to make sense though.

[Lol-x]

1970 is the date of publication of the booklet/manual so it would only be issued with a watch manufactured in 1970 or later.

Accordingly, it is impossible that a 1969 GMT 1675 would have been shipped out of the Rolex factory with a 1670 paper manual.

However, if the watch stood in the retailer's display case for a year or more, then if the retailer kept the papers separately, they may have mixed them up and so your 1969 watch may have been sold with 1970 paper manual.

Look at the dial depicted on the 1970 papers, is it the same style dial as your 1969 GMT? If so then I would not be too concerned, but its all a matter of degree.

[Pocosso]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

1970 is the date of publication of the booklet/manual so it would only be issued with a watch manufactured in 1970 or later.

Accordingly, it is impossible that a 1969 GMT 1675 would have been shipped out of the Rolex factory with a 1670 paper manual.

However, if the watch stood in the retailer's display case for a year or more, then if the retailer kept the papers separately, they may have mixed them up and so your 1969 watch may have been sold with 1970 paper manual.

Look at the dial depicted on the 1970 papers, is it the same style dial as your 1969 GMT? If so then I would not be too concerned, but its all a matter of degree.

The set was composed by the AD, Rolex ships the watches Only. So if the watch was sitting a shop for one year, that days was common, the booklets could easily have a younger date.

[limym]

yes that is why it is worrying because the watch sale date was 1969 January. and the booklet was 1970 printed.

anyway, i found a 1966 booklet in english and i was wondering if that will be ok to put it together with my set? i am left with that piece only for it to be a complete set. please advise. it is my first vintage watch. is the 1966 booklet too far off from a 1969 January sale date piece?

[lee fowler]

Originally Posted by limym

yes that is why it is worrying because the watch sale date was 1969 January. and the booklet was 1970 printed.

anyway, i found a 1966 booklet in english and i was wondering if that will be ok to put it together with my set? i am left with that piece only for it to be a complete set. please advise. it is my first vintage watch. is the 1966 booklet too far off from a 1969 January sale date piece?

Yes

[iclick]

Originally Posted by springer

If the case back is 1969, a 1970 manual is well within range for that year. Back then almost every set that I have seen was sold two to three years after the year stamped on the case back.

For reference, the original booklet for my GMT (#232xxxx, case back IV68) is dated 1970. I bought the watch new in Jan. 1971.