Opinions on 1675 PCG Gilt Dial

[fflump]

Hi I've been offered a two-owner 1675 s/n 100XXXX.
i.e. 1964 ish manufacture date
Has the original guarantee booklet stating the s/n and dated June 1st 1965 and stamped by the supplying jeweller. Also service papers from 1986. The correct s/n is engraved between the lugs. So great provenance.

Appears to be a non-chapter ring Type B dial, underline 'swiss' only variant.
Is this correct? Lume a bit lumpy but could be age?

Case seems to be a PCG of the El Cornino type, which would make it a late example according to gmtmaster1675.com.
Is this correct?

Hands must have been replaced at some stage as the GMT arrow is of the later big size. Is this a disaster?

The bezel insert is obviously not the late 1960s fat font, and too early for that anyway, but do people think it is the original early 60s bezel or a service replacement? The top half of the '8' is oval and not round. According to gmtmaster1675.com service dials had round tops to the 8 so this would suggest it is original. Or is it a replacement? It is not very faded but the owner did not wear it much at all.

Lugs seem in reasonable nick. It's on a 1970 7836 bracelet so the original rivet one must have broken.

Any comments at all especially on the bezel insert and dial and CG very welcome!

[fflump]

crown guard

[fflump]

.

[Tom1675]

All of your observations seem reasonable. You def need a sm GMT hand, which is fine bc this one needs replacing. Insert is a later replacement.

[fflump]

I guess a period-correct hand GMT hand and bezel insert would sort the watch quite nicely?
The date wheel is closed 6 and 9, hooked 7 so consistent with mid 60's.

I'm struggling to value it (I'm UK) as it has the bezel and hand issue, but a gilt El Cornino with original stamped booklet from 1965 is quite special.

Any opinions welcome. The sellers are nice people so I want to do right be me and them.

[swaini3]

Nice watch. bezel and insert are later IMO.

[fflump]

Originally Posted by swaini3

Nice watch. bezel and insert are later IMO.

Thanks for your comments.

Regarding the bezel-I am interested as to why do you think it is later?

I only got my info from here:

https://gmtmaster1675.com/the-bezel/

To me the bezel looks more like the 'early' bezel than the 'standard' bezel (since the gloves span the entire depth of the bezel and taper inwards towards the bottom (and the transition took place around the date of manufacture)

Did the 1675 bezel change during the 70's from the 'standard' bezel that was used from the mid 60's?

[swaini3]

here's a pic from VRF (another forum). Yours is the middle one iMO. The correct bezel is the bottom one. You can see a slight difference in shape. The top one is later 16750 or service ones. thats what I know.

[swaini3]

More importantly, I would focus on the dial, movement, case engravings and caseback, paperwork etc. AND THE SELLER.... There's more to it than the website you referred to and this will help you judge if the price is fair + I'd hate to see another vintage purchase turn . I dont like the lume so much even though it could be original so I'd ask for UV pictures and wait for other members' comments.

[fflump]

Originally Posted by swaini3

here's a pic from VRF (another forum). Yours is the middle one iMO. The correct bezel is the bottom one. You can see a slight difference in shape. The top one is later 16750 or service ones. thats what I know.

Thanks a million. Yes it is definitely the middle one. I did not know that the 16750 bezel fitted the 1675.

[fflump]

Originally Posted by swaini3

More importantly, I would focus on the dial, movement, case engravings and caseback, paperwork etc. AND THE SELLER.... There's more to it than the website you referred to and this will help you judge if the price is fair + I'd hate to see another vintage purchase turn . I dont like the lume so much even though it could be original so I'd ask for UV pictures and wait for other members' comments.

The engravings between the lugs check out-I have inspected them personally. The sellers are also beyond reproach I spent 2h with them today at their home.

The movement was recently serviced and though I have not inspected it it is clearly a low vph and non-hacking.

[fflump]

.

[fflump]

.

[swaini3]

All the best with the purchase mate. Im a fan of old paperwork. Serial number vs sale date does not raise any concerns. I know the UK had different model numbers, I'd check if 1015 is for 1675..... The bezel and insert are no biggie, they're available with some patience. If you end up purchasing it, let us know.

[MrChamfers]

It looks like a couple of plots have been relumed, and is that mold on the GMT hand?

[rootbeer7]

The lume is sloppy. Particularly the triangle at 12. Is there any reason to believe it couldn’t have been relumed at some point?

[harry in montreal]

Thé lume plots look to have been touched up

[fflump]

No reason to assume reluming the 2 previous owners were successful blue collar businessmen from Yorkshire so left it with Rolex AD and that’s that.
To commission reluming would not be on their radar

[fflump]

Originally Posted by swaini3

here's a pic from VRF (another forum). Yours is the middle one iMO. The correct bezel is the bottom one. You can see a slight difference in shape. The top one is later 16750 or service ones. thats what I know.

Do you have a link to the thread that has that picture?
Just to provide context.

Best wishes

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by swaini3

More importantly, I would focus on the dial, movement, case engravings and caseback, paperwork etc. AND THE SELLER.... There's more to it than the website you referred to and this will help you judge if the price is fair + I'd hate to see another vintage purchase turn . I dont like the lume so much even though it could be original so I'd ask for UV pictures and wait for other members' comments.

the lume should react under UV, so a pic of that would be useful.

[fflump]

The bezel in the watch I am interested in looks just like the middle one
The bottom one you mention is maybe a bit too early year-wise?

Mid 60s seem to be somewhat transitional. A couple of examples below-I am not expert though.

https://www.ap-watches.com/en/rolex-...sia-bezel-1968

https://hqmilton.com/products/1965-r...w-780939525728

[swaini3]

here you go:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/vint...s-t252956.html

[swaini3]

Originally Posted by fflump

The bezel in the watch I am interested in looks just like the middle one
The bottom one you mention is maybe a bit too early year-wise?

Mid 60s seem to be somewhat transitional. A couple of examples below-I am not expert though.

https://www.ap-watches.com/en/rolex-...sia-bezel-1968

https://hqmilton.com/products/1965-r...w-780939525728

I doubt anyone knows the exact switchover year.....

[Filipão]

Originally Posted by swaini3

All the best with the purchase mate. Im a fan of old paperwork. Serial number vs sale date does not raise any concerns. I know the UK had different model numbers, I'd check if 1015 is for 1675..... The bezel and insert are no biggie, they're available with some patience. If you end up purchasing it, let us know.

Wise advice!

[springer]

Originally Posted by fflump

The bezel in the watch I am interested in looks just like the middle one
The bottom one you mention is maybe a bit too early year-wise?

Mid 60s seem to be somewhat transitional. A couple of examples below-I am not expert though.

https://www.ap-watches.com/en/rolex-...sia-bezel-1968

https://hqmilton.com/products/1965-r...w-780939525728

The bezel on the hq gilt GMT is later than the watch.

[springer]

Originally Posted by fflump

Thanks for your comments.

Regarding the bezel-I am interested as to why do you think it is later?

I only got my info from here:

https://gmtmaster1675.com/the-bezel/

To me the bezel looks more like the 'early' bezel than the 'standard' bezel (since the gloves span the entire depth of the bezel and taper inwards towards the bottom (and the transition took place around the date of manufacture)

Did the 1675 bezel change during the 70's from the 'standard' bezel that was used from the mid 60's?

There are basically three bezel variations with the 1675s. The bezel info at gmtmaster1675.com, which is helpful, is somewhat confusing. The second picture on the right side has a later bezel and is not a 1960s bezel. The correct bezel for this watch would be the second one depicted below from the VRF thread and reposted by swaini3 in post #9.

The correct bezel for the watch being discussed from the fist post in this thread would be the third or bottom bezel from the VRF thread.

Check the thread from VRF which depicts the proper order of the 1675 bezels.

[fflump]

Originally Posted by Filipão

Wise advice!

Thanks so the 1015 was a catalog number for the UK for a period in the 1960s.

[fflump]

Originally Posted by swaini3

here you go:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/vint...s-t252956.html

Belated thanks for this link swaini3. It is an honest watch and honest seller but seems 57 yrs have thrown up replacement bracelet, hands, bezel, insert and a bit of mould too, as well as lume on the dial that I do not have a UV lamp to assess. Disappointing but such is life. My search continues...