ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
19 March 2018, 06:51 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 8
|
All Original?
I have a lead on a nice gmt 16750. Wanted the community’s opinion on originality of watch. Everything looks good but was wondering if the bezel is original to the watch or a later replacement? Does it matter?
I’ll be getting more detailed pictures later in the week, this is just what I have so far. |
19 March 2018, 10:09 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Adam
Location: Costa Blanca,
Watch: YMII,GMTII,DAYTONA
Posts: 5,288
|
GENUINE in my opinion
- Model 16750 (1981-88)? - Based on 580 endlink Nice Piece Adam
__________________
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. Winston Churchill "We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done." |
19 March 2018, 11:36 AM | #3 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Adam
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: SEIKO
Posts: 28,362
|
That polished-out damage on the 5 o'clock lug would stop me buying.
|
20 March 2018, 11:33 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Adam
Location: Costa Blanca,
Watch: YMII,GMTII,DAYTONA
Posts: 5,288
|
No one commented on the bezel - as you asked
Although it does not match mine - I have seen that pattern and it was genuine. Yours looks very pristine, so I suspect replacement and possible aftermarket. A
__________________
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. Winston Churchill "We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done." |
20 March 2018, 11:50 AM | #5 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: Apr 2012
Real Name: Tim
Location: Pennsylvania
Watch: 14060M
Posts: 71,828
|
Yes, that lug has been hit hard with the polishing wheel.
__________________
Rolex Submariner 14060M Omega Seamaster 2254.50 DOXA Professional 1200T Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons TRF's "After Dark" Bar & NightClub Patron P Club Member #17 2 FA ENABLED
|
20 March 2018, 02:40 PM | #6 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 6,171
|
The bezel insert looks genuine but NOS from the mid '90s as a service replacement. The crystal also looks rather new since the poly should be scratched to match the condition of the case.
Between this and the insert being so new, it's likely been externally serviced recently using NOS parts. No clue on the internals, however. The lugs look rounded from brushing the lug tops freehand rather than using the right method. Or, maybe it's just really unfortunate lighting making it look worse than in person. Get photos of the watch face straight on and detailed shots of each lug. That will help. |
20 March 2018, 03:09 PM | #7 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: jP
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT-MASTER
Posts: 17,197
|
Based on the dial, the watch is from 79 to around 1982. The insert is genuine but later production. Bracelet could be original for the watch - date codes are E 1980, F 1981, G 1982, H 1983, I 1984. (First 16750s had 6.1 million serial numbers.)
A serial number would help the discussion.
__________________
Member of NAWCC since 1990. INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics. |
21 March 2018, 11:43 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 8
|
Thanks everyone for your comments! I’m getting a lot of opposing view so I am having a hard time figuring out who’s to follow. This is my what my gut tells me:
Lugs: I think it’s a bad picture. so once I have a close up I will be able to tell the condition Insert: this one is hard. When I first saw the picture I had the same reaction “looks too new” but I have seen other 16750 with the same rich color. I have no doubt it’s a Rolex insert and not second market. The question is is it original to the watch when it came off the assembly line? Is there a way to tell? Crystal: once I have the close up picture I can better tell the condition. How can you tell if the crystal Is original to the watch when it first came off the assembly line? Like the bezel it’s this hard to tell? |
21 March 2018, 11:48 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 8
|
Springer
Thanks Springer for your post. By “later production” do you mean the insert could be a replacement and not original to the watch when it was shipped from the factory?
|
21 March 2018, 11:52 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 8
|
Springer
I couldn’t find any information on 16750 dial. Do you know where to look? How many 16750 dial variations are out there?
|
21 March 2018, 01:03 PM | #11 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: jP
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT-MASTER
Posts: 17,197
|
The insert is later production. Not from the era for tbe watch.
I would be careful with your 40-year-old crystal. It adds no value for me wben I purchase. What's important is the case, dial, original bracelet and insert. That's where the value is.
__________________
Member of NAWCC since 1990. INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics. |
21 March 2018, 01:53 PM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 8
|
Thanks Springer
How can you tell the insert is a later production?
|
21 March 2018, 04:35 PM | #13 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 6,171
|
Experience. It's a mid-'90s service insert. Rolex might still make them that way to keep the vintage look but that's how they looked around that time.
Quote:
If you're looking for a genuine 16750 then this certainly looks genuine. If you're looking for one with 100% production-line parts, this isn't it. It's still a great watch either way, assuming the lugs aren't too bad. |
|
22 March 2018, 09:57 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 8
|
An update to everyone who have commented on this thread.
The 16750 turned out to be a dud! -The case back had the 1675 ref. Number and not 16750 -The ref number on the claspt had a R12 number which didn’t match the typical claspt ref numbers -You guys were right about the bezel -The lume on the second hand did not match the rest -the lump on some of the hour/second indicators were missing This dealer wanted $15.5 for the watch claiming that gmt 16750 are hot right now. Such BS!!! Lesson learned, DO YOUR HOMEWORK!!! |
22 March 2018, 10:57 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 8
|
Update
[QUOTE=037;8392966]Experience. It's a mid-'90s service insert. Rolex might still make them that way to keep the vintage look but that's how they looked around that time.
You've seen other 16750s with that bezel because they, too, have had their inserts replaced. A watch that old with the original insert will be faded purely because the red dyes used in anodizing back then weren't as colorfast as later dyes. It's why so many inserts have faded to orange, pink or entirely faded to the raw aluminum color. The blue dyes were better but also found themselves fading with time. If you're looking for a genuine 16750 then this certainly looks genuine. If you're looking for one with 100% production-line parts, this isn't it. It's still a great watch either way, assuming the lugs aren't too bad.[/QUOTE. Update. The watch had a case back with 1675 and not 16750. Claspt had a R12 ref number which was not typical of Rolex ref numbers. There were so many questionable details on this watch! And the guy wanted $15.5k claiming that 16750 are hot. Outrageous!!!! |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.