ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Aston · 15 June 2009, 08:19 AM

Hello everyone,

As I'm looking to buy a 1680 Red Sub, I need please an advice from experts. Could you please tell me what you think about this one:

The seller tells that the watch was produced in 1971.

Thanks a lot for your help ;-)

Flaxmoore · 15 June 2009, 08:23 AM

Magnification looks way under 2.5x.

Aston · 15 June 2009, 08:55 AM

The magnification also surprised me. But it's not a long F or MK I dial...

DRAWTOOL · 15 June 2009, 10:30 AM

are we sure the cyclops is even there?
kinda looks like it was there, but is gone now...

springer · 15 June 2009, 10:58 AM

Cyclops is history, looks gone to me. Band is a Rolex replacement. The dial looks original from the photos, but the pics aren't the best. I wouldn't buy it sight unseen.

stevemulholland3 · 20 June 2009, 05:05 PM

I dont think that dial was the original to that watch..

Orchi · 21 June 2009, 03:35 AM

Err buddy Aston...Orchi agrees with buddy Springer...

The case is heavily polished down...
The movement is...err...screw*d...
The bracelet isn't for the 1680 RED...originally.
The crown doesn't look right...
The case could be quite corroded...
Case reference n serial # are not shown...
The Pearl is missing...

Orchi for one...wouldn't bother with it...

15 June 2009, 08:19 AM	#1
Aston "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: France Posts: 79	1680 Red Sub : real or fake? Hello everyone, As I'm looking to buy a 1680 Red Sub, I need please an advice from experts. Could you please tell me what you think about this one: The seller tells that the watch was produced in 1971. Thanks a lot for your help ;-)

15 June 2009, 10:58 AM	#5
springer 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: jP Location: Texas Watch: GMT-MASTER Posts: 17,215	Cyclops is history, looks gone to me. Band is a Rolex replacement. The dial looks original from the photos, but the pics aren't the best. I wouldn't buy it sight unseen. __________________ 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.

15 June 2009, 08:23 AM	#2
Flaxmoore Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Casey Location: Toledo, Ohio Watch: Alpha Milsub Posts: 704	Magnification looks way under 2.5x.

15 June 2009, 08:55 AM	#3
Aston "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: France Posts: 79	The magnification also surprised me. But it's not a long F or MK I dial...

15 June 2009, 10:30 AM	#4
DRAWTOOL "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Real Name: Mikey Uí Néill Location: Olden Texas Watch: 14060M & 16570 Posts: 1,941	are we sure the cyclops is even there? kinda looks like it was there, but is gone now...

20 June 2009, 05:05 PM	#6
stevemulholland3 Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: steven Location: tampa bay Watch: 1680 18k sub Posts: 6,673	I dont think that dial was the original to that watch..

21 June 2009, 03:35 AM	#7
Orchi Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Malaysia Posts: 2,934	Err buddy Aston...Orchi agrees with buddy Springer... The case is heavily polished down... The movement is...err...screw*d... The bracelet isn't for the 1680 RED...originally. The crown doesn't look right... The case could be quite corroded... Case reference n serial # are not shown... The Pearl is missing... Orchi for one...wouldn't bother with it...

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