ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

oscarmariner · 12 May 2021, 04:38 AM

Hi guys,

I'm here again, asking for your opinion about vintage GMTs. The following image is relative to a 16750 from '83. The details I want to discuss with you about are:

- Lumes patina: there is some dark spots at 2, 6, 7 and 8: umidity??
- The second hand looks "rusty": is it a bad sign? (again: water?)
- cyclope is misaligned: maybe the glass position is incorrect
- bezel: is the insert period correct?

thx in advance for your comments

oscarmariner · 12 May 2021, 04:41 AM

other:

Innocenti · 12 May 2021, 04:54 PM

I like these anyone want to swap for a 5513 lol

Sherbie · 12 May 2021, 05:32 PM

Hands are often pitted on this reference - nothing to worry about, and indeed, could indicate that the hands are original

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Chris75 · 15 May 2021, 11:21 AM

Insert looks ok and I wouldn't mind a bit of aging on hands.

Pilot1985 · 15 May 2021, 09:28 PM

Doesn't the second hand has a completely different color than the rest of the hands?

It could be that particular one is replaced ?

The cyclops maybe wrong installation, I would think if there is some movement on the cristal it would not be water proof and air tight leading to humidity and corrosion in. just a though

oscarmariner · 17 May 2021, 05:16 AM

That's an interesting point. The second hand looks replaced to me and also the lumes show humidity traces.

The seller told me that he can adjust the glass position in order to align the cyclope to the date window. The caliber looks clean anyway. I'm going to post pictures of it

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilot1985

Doesn't the second hand has a completely different color than the rest of the hands?

It could be that particular one is replaced ?

The cyclops maybe wrong installation, I would think if there is some movement on the cristal it would not be water proof and air tight leading to humidity and corrosion in. just a though

oscarmariner · 17 May 2021, 05:18 AM

movement:

Chris75 · 17 May 2021, 06:58 AM

Caliber looks ok, movement number should be around 700/800k.

Second hands was replaced, you should ask for a UV shot to see if hands match each other at the UV.

A UV shot may also be good to check the dial, but from picture everything looks fine.

12 May 2021, 04:54 PM	#3
Innocenti "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2018 Location: UK Posts: 830	I like these anyone want to swap for a 5513 lol

12 May 2021, 05:32 PM	#4
Sherbie "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Tx Posts: 150	Hands are often pitted on this reference - nothing to worry about, and indeed, could indicate that the hands are original Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

15 May 2021, 11:21 AM	#5
Chris75 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2021 Location: Switzerland Posts: 75	Insert looks ok and I wouldn't mind a bit of aging on hands.

15 May 2021, 09:28 PM	#6
Pilot1985 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2019 Location: Spain Watch: GMT 16750 Posts: 86	Doesn't the second hand has a completely different color than the rest of the hands? It could be that particular one is replaced ? The cyclops maybe wrong installation, I would think if there is some movement on the cristal it would not be water proof and air tight leading to humidity and corrosion in. just a though

17 May 2021, 06:58 AM	#9
Chris75 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2021 Location: Switzerland Posts: 75	Caliber looks ok, movement number should be around 700/800k. Second hands was replaced, you should ask for a UV shot to see if hands match each other at the UV. A UV shot may also be good to check the dial, but from picture everything looks fine.

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