The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Classifieds > WatchOut!!!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11 August 2021, 07:15 PM   #1
NickD1975
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Opinions on this 16710 please?

In the interests of increasing my knowledge, and a possible purchase, does this 16710 look correct for a late 80s example? It looks fine to me, although clearly polished, but I’d be curious to know if there is anything I’ve missed.
NickD1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 August 2021, 12:25 AM   #2
springer
2024 Pledge Member
 
springer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: jP
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT-MASTER
Posts: 17,194
I believe your evaluation has summed it up fairly well.
__________________
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.
springer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12 August 2021, 10:44 PM   #3
NickD1975
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Thanks for the confirmation - it's appreciated
NickD1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2021, 01:18 AM   #4
dbhak22
2024 Pledge Member
 
dbhak22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,958
Piling on to confirm your assessment is accurate. First thing I noticed was the case being "soft". It's not "overpolished" and thin by any means but the lugs/crown guards have a soft look from polishing.
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808)
dbhak22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2021, 06:34 AM   #5
NickD1975
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbhak22 View Post
Piling on to confirm your assessment is accurate. First thing I noticed was the case being "soft". It's not "overpolished" and thin by any means but the lugs/crown guards have a soft look from polishing.
I think a certain amount of polishing is unavoidable for any watch that has gone through secondhand dealers at some point in its life. I just sold a watch (not a Rolex) with marks/scratches but no dings and the first thing the buyer is doing is polishing it!

I’d prefer it unpolished but I understand that most non enthusiast buyers want their watches to look new.
NickD1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2021, 06:44 AM   #6
dbhak22
2024 Pledge Member
 
dbhak22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickD1975 View Post
I think a certain amount of polishing is unavoidable for any watch that has gone through secondhand dealers at some point in its life. I just sold a watch (not a Rolex) with marks/scratches but no dings and the first thing the buyer is doing is polishing it!

I’d prefer it unpolished but I understand that most non enthusiast buyers want their watches to look new.
Yes, totally up to the buyer and their preferences. Personally, I'll take dinged/unpolished over clean/polished. But there are those that would prefer the opposite.

I was just calling out what I noticed and you can take the information and considerate it for decision making. But the watch looks correct to answer your question.
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808)
dbhak22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13 August 2021, 04:31 PM   #7
NickD1975
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbhak22 View Post
Yes, totally up to the buyer and their preferences. Personally, I'll take dinged/unpolished over clean/polished. But there are those that would prefer the opposite.

I was just calling out what I noticed and you can take the information and considerate it for decision making. But the watch looks correct to answer your question.
Thank you.
NickD1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 August 2021, 05:24 PM   #8
NickD1975
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Thanks for the input - it's now mine!
NickD1975 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 August 2021, 08:04 PM   #9
joli160
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
 
joli160's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NL
Watch: Yachtmaster
Posts: 14,343
Huge congrats
__________________
Day Date 18238, Yachtmaster 16622, Deepsea 116660, Submariner 116619, SkyD 326935, DJ 178271, DJ 69158, Yachtmaster 169622, GMT 116713LN, GMT 126711.
joli160 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 August 2021, 01:32 AM   #10
dbhak22
2024 Pledge Member
 
dbhak22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,958
Nicely done! Congrats!
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808)
dbhak22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

DavidSW Watches

Coronet

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.