Gmt 1675

[mortysnl]

Hi everyone,

I am new in vintage Rolex and would like to know if this one (link below) is correct to its original specs.
It's in Netherlands where i live too, so i can get there to have a close look. Where should i pay attention to?

But my main question now is on the basis of the online pictures, how far is this one correct?

I have read a lot on the net but still my knowledge is absolutely next to nothing.

Any help is much appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

https://www.chrono24.com/nl/rolex/gm...mpaign=sharing

[roh123]

What is the serial? A 1968 watch should be in the 1.8m range and should have a mk1 dial. This is a later dial so most probable dial and hands are changed. Bezel insert is also a service part and frankly the folded oyster is later than the watch. Do note the mismatching end links. The case is polished and in my opinion quite soft. Other than that the watch looks pretty nice. ;)

[springer]

I'll echo rohr's comments above and add the dial is a service dial - it appears the dial, hands and insert have all been changed at a service at some point during the life of this watch. There is nothing wrong with service parts but based on my experience, the watch should be priced accordingly with service parts - in this case, it is not.

The Swiss 7836 folded link bracelets first appeared around 1969 or 1970 so it could very well be correct but the 80 end links would not be correct for a GMT. The case seems to have nice, fat lugs, are a little soft and have cupping by the spring bar holes which is caused from excessive polishing in those areas.

Based on my study of case backs, which I personally use to date my watches, 1968 case backs are found with serial numbers ranging from 1.8XXXXX through 2.1XXXXX.

[swish77]

Springer has said it all above, but let me add that the seller's description leaves a lot to be desired. On that alone, I'd pass.

Only about 40 words describing the watch, incorrectly (razor-sharp case?) and with no mention of the service parts or beginning of the serial number, and then about 400 words with needless generic background on the reference pulled from the Internet. And only four mediocre photos on a watch that's priced at about $11,000? Very weak effort and way overpriced for what it is.

[springer]

Originally Posted by swish77

Springer has said it all above, but let me add that the seller's description leaves a lot to be desired. On that alone, I'd pass.

About 40 words describing the watch, incorrectly (razor sharp case?) and with no mention of the service parts, and then about 400 words with generic background on the reference pulled from the Internet. And only four mediocre photos on a watch that's about $11,000? And no mention of the beginning of the serial number? Very weak effort and way overpriced for what it is.

X2 Aaron. I felt like I was reading from an ebay auction listing.

[mortysnl]

Thank you very much for all the info. Very helpful!
What would be accordingly price of this watch? Any range? Between 6&7000?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tom1675]

If you were looking for an early matte GMT in solid original condition you can expect to pay around the listed price, but this example is far from it. IMO you shouldn't buy this watch, when you are looking at it you will wish you had held out for a better example, even if the price were adjusted appropriately.

Check the sales forum on this site and you will find what you are looking for from a trusted, knowledgeable seller. You don't need to try it on as you know what you want...