ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
21 September 2017, 03:36 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
Submariner Flat Four 50th Anniversary
Hi
Can anyone out there help ? I purchased a brand new Flat 4 from an authorised UK dealer back in March 2004 and have all the relevant paperwork including purchase receipt. This watch has been stored away and only very occasionally worn (max 10 times). On looking at the watch today for the 1st time I have noticed that there is a querk within the dial face, ie the batons and minute markers do not align as they should - see picture attached, in particular 30 mins in relation to position to the 'Swiss Made' This watch is totally 100% original without any servicing or modifications since 2004 ! My question is does this decrease or increase the potential value of the watch ? I cannot understand how this ever passed the Rolex QC Thanks Trimmy |
21 September 2017, 03:42 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Atl
Posts: 920
|
I would say F the value. Its a beautiful watch. Its a shame to keep her stored away. Wear it in good health.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
21 September 2017, 03:42 AM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2017
Real Name: Jaime
Location: Here
Posts: 5,606
|
Interesting. You have not noticed this in the last 13 years owning the watch?
|
21 September 2017, 03:43 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Chicago
Watch: explorer
Posts: 2,122
|
That's odd and the font spacing looks big too.
|
21 September 2017, 03:48 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Real Name: Brian
Location: Northern Virginia
Watch: One of Not Many
Posts: 17,895
|
Neither?
__________________
Vacheron Constantin Traditionnelle Complete Calendar, Glashutte PanoInverse, Glashutte SeaQ Panorama Date, Omega Aqua Terra 150, Omega CK 859, Omega Speedmaster 3861 Moonwatch, Glashutte Senator Exellence, Rolex 116710 GMT Master II BLNR, Breitling Superocean Steelfish, JLC Atmos Transparent |
21 September 2017, 03:51 AM | #6 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 12,344
|
Something's wrong...oval O it's not there either in Rolex.
At least..don't look like it from this pic. |
21 September 2017, 03:52 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
Have a taken it back today to where l purchased it from back in 2004 and they were as surprised as I was, once you notice it.
|
21 September 2017, 03:54 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
|
21 September 2017, 03:56 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
|
21 September 2017, 03:59 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: Tony
Location: Loughton UK
Watch: 16610LV no Rehault
Posts: 369
|
Not a very good pic to make a judgement on (better camera angle and rotate pic to 12 o'clock would be better).
I don't think it would make much if any difference in the price - given the hype that surrounds this model now (when I bought mine back in 2007, Flat 4, Mks I,II, III & IV dials etc, were not an issue - in fact most dealers I was speaking to at the time had on average 3 - 5 pieces for sale, believe it or not!). I must say though, to my eye I think I would've noticed any faults on mine sooner than 13 years... no offence. |
21 September 2017, 04:03 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Leicestershire UK
Posts: 697
|
It would reduce it's value. Who wants a wonky Sub?
But... it may be a fake. Rolex would not produce something so shoddy. Check its authenticity carefully! |
21 September 2017, 04:08 AM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Real Name: Frank
Location: Chicago
Watch: 16570, 1601,
Posts: 452
|
Can we get a wrist shot?
|
21 September 2017, 04:20 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
Thanks, but if it's a fake then most of the new Rolex watches purchased in Northampton from the same dealer must also be......not.
|
21 September 2017, 04:22 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
|
21 September 2017, 04:24 AM | #15 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
Quote:
|
|
21 September 2017, 04:26 AM | #16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Leicestershire UK
Posts: 697
|
If it's real, even after 13 years I'd be asking the AD for a replacement. How embarrassing for Rolex to have something like that knocking about.
Of course you have no right to a refund or replacement after the elapsed time, but if they can see the "faults" they must admit it's not up to Rolex standards and ought to do something about it? |
21 September 2017, 04:27 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: HK & USA
Watch: GMTs,1803, 16610LV
Posts: 2,001
|
There should be a minute track tick mark centered on each round plot as well as the indices at 6, 9 and the triangle at 12'oclock.
The minute track markers on the dial in the photo aren't even close to being centered. In fact, they're about as off-center as they can be and since they share the same surface as the plots/indices even photographed from that angle there's no parallax effect especially on plots 7-11 o'clock. It's easy to tell it's very messed-up. If it were mine it would be on it's way to an RSC already. As far as I'm concerned it's greatly de-valued even if real, and it's so messed-up I'd be wanting to know for sure I'd been sold a genuine article. |
21 September 2017, 04:27 AM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Real Name: Alex
Location: Maryland,usa
Watch: None at the moment
Posts: 1,137
|
|
21 September 2017, 04:32 AM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Real Name: David
Location: Chicago
Watch: SkyD,JC, BLNR, Ex2
Posts: 1,578
|
Just checked my GMT II. You are right, those round markers don't line up with the "minute" markers on the edge on your watch. Very strange.
I don't blame you, I would not have checked mine if you did not bring up your issue. Maybe this is something RSC can fix? |
21 September 2017, 04:42 AM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Larry
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Yes
Posts: 34,443
|
Heck, if you've got all the documentation, I wouldn't mess with it. If anything, it would make the watch that much more "special."
As far as affecting value, I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. People get on here and claim they have something worth more for a whole lot less...IMO. |
21 September 2017, 04:59 AM | #21 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 12,344
|
You said you bought it from a dealer in 2004, so it should be a mk1....this means that the watch should have these characteristics:
1) flat 4 on the insert (your watch has this). 2) Swiss Made on the bottom spanning 5 minute mark ticks. 3) An oval O as opposed to a round O on the "Rolex" 4) R in "Oyster" should be centered under the 2 legs of R in "Rolex"....(seems like the case here) Here is my mk1 for comparison: See the difference in orientation/positioning of your Swiss Made on the bottom and the difference on the O in "Rolex"? That's why I'm saying it doesn't look right for a mk1......I'm not exactly sure what's up with the dial actually because the Swiss Made orientation makes it look like a a much later dial variation...but the R in "Oyster" seems centered with a non-oval O in "Rolex" as is in mk1/mk2.....not sure there is such a variation according to the VRF guide: http://www.network54.com/Forum/20759...ary+Submariner Something seems weird. I'll wait for more input from others. |
21 September 2017, 05:06 AM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: rolexforums.com
Posts: 5,346
|
I would suspect after 13 years you have no cause of action against Rolex, as the watch has been in your ownership since you bought it, and therefore acceptance of it / condition.
Majority of people would say it was almost unbelievable that you did not notice this flaw sooner. You can either pay for a dial change, or accept its 'quirkiness'. |
21 September 2017, 05:15 AM | #23 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: HK & USA
Watch: GMTs,1803, 16610LV
Posts: 2,001
|
Quote:
|
|
21 September 2017, 05:26 AM | #24 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Wales
Posts: 77
|
I would not want it to be 'fixed'. Assuming it's genuine, then you have a quirky original mk1. If it's fixed, it's no longer an original mk1, is it?
Last edited by HereBeDragons; 21 September 2017 at 05:27 AM.. Reason: Spelling |
21 September 2017, 05:28 AM | #25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 518
|
Even the 12 o'clock mark is not lined up with crown.
|
21 September 2017, 05:53 AM | #26 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Westport, CT
Posts: 294
|
|
21 September 2017, 05:55 AM | #27 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
Thanks for this.
I have no doubt that's it authentic as it was purchased from the main Rolex Dealer in Northampton who l have purchased other Rolex models from over the years. What, on discovering this, is how it ever passed Rolex QC. If Rolex and the Dealer didn't pick it up, then l don't feel so bad about myself not doing so. At least l now know it's different in its own peculiar way and for that reason it makes it special to me when l look at it in the future. Yes l suppose |
21 September 2017, 05:57 AM | #28 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
The watch was purchased new from the AD with all tags and stickers, which I have,
|
21 September 2017, 06:02 AM | #29 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Real Name: David
Location: Chicago
Watch: SkyD,JC, BLNR, Ex2
Posts: 1,578
|
Quote:
|
|
21 September 2017, 06:09 AM | #30 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: U.K.
Posts: 36
|
They offered to do whatever l would wish as l have been a customer over the years.
I intend on keeping it, as l am certain it is genuine and this is human error on the part of Rolex, which it makes it a very special watch to me, as l doubt there is another like it ! |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.