Tudor Red Ranger Discussion; Authentic, or Not....

[M4tt]

Good morning Gentlemen,

I'm looking for knowledge here. I have already posted this in the WUS Rolex forum but Aiko suggested I should also post here.

Yesterday, I received a rather nice looking Tudor Ranger. I couldn't put my finger on it, but the watch made me uneasy. Shortly after posting the post below, Strela, one of the WUS mods confirmed that the watch was a Franken but didn't really go into very much detail as to why.

It is probably easier if I just post the body of my original post:

_____

This is my first Tudor and my third and a half offering from the Rolex stable. Initially I slapped it onto my idea of an appropriate strap and enjoyed.



Taking a couple of quick 'archive' pictures with the hands out of the way:



and naturally a couple of pictures of the movement, a ETA 2784 from back when some ETA would autowind with a discrete zip rather than the death rattle of a Russian tractor as they do today.



I guess the word is 'appropriately aged' is appropriate but it's doing everything smoothly enough, has a good strong tick and hasn't dropped a second in a couple of hours (even if the regulation hints at service time...)

So, on paper everything looks fine: the 37mm case proclaims that the watch is a 90800 with the serial 821xxx which as far as I can ascertain is appropriate for the movement. The tritium is nicely aged and in good condition on both the dial and hands and the case is, frankly not far off NOS with only a few dings, scratches and opening marks.

However, and it's a fairly hazy however, I feel uneasy. I'm not bad with old Omega and like to think I have a reasonable intuition there
but the fact is, I'm not much of a Rolex expert: I have a nice 80's Airking, a 60's Oyster Royal (and the half...). However, this isn't really enough to start to grasp why I feel uneasy.

My unease has certainly been made worse by my google research. Apparently the 'Red Ranger' is a common fake. However, to fake the right movement and even yellowed tritum wear is, well, taking it a bit further than the usual. FOr a rare Sub I can see it, for a Tudor that seems to come in at less than $1500 at present it seems like a lot of effort.

Anyway, the point is that you are the experts, so here is all the detail you could ever want to allow you to put me out of my misery:

The other half of the movement:



The caseback:



The caseback front:



Crownside:



non crown side:



Twixt the lugs, model number:



Twixt the lugs, serial number:



Now, going through all this there is absolutely nothing that, to me, obviously says fake, franken or redial. The case does appear to be in impressive condition, but little better than my Royal which is very genuine indeed. However, I still feel uneasy.

So, can someone, put me out of my misery either way?

Cheers.
-------------------
Having slept upon it, I wrote a second post:
--------------------
Okay, I have slept on it and I have a problem.

As far as I am concerned, Strela is an authority to be trusted. As such the issue is not whether the watch is a franken or not, the question is what evidence I have to lay before the seller when I ask for my money back.

Right now I haven't got much. The movement is definitely authentic and, as far as I can see, appropriate to the numbers on the case. Even when examining it with a 10x loupe it certainty still looks good.

It would appear that, at least, 34mm 'Red Rangers' existed as there is one here:

http://forums.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=92527

Which apparently has Rolex paperwork authenticating it.

Apart from the differences one would expect between the 37mm case and the 34mm one, the only significant difference seems to be the lume: the real one has thinner numbers made of solid lume. However, mine has identical thin lume numbers inside the thicker printed numbers:



So, having slept on it I think I have formulated why I was initially uneasy:

1) The disparity between the movement and the case, however, I have seen this before in watches I know to be genuine - 316l is simply less reactive than brass and nickel.

2) compared to, say, my Smiths W10, the dial doesn't feel 'matte' enough (while it feels too modern, I have also seen similar looking old watches)

(3) I'm not comfortable with the way that the numbers have the lume inside them rather than being all lume (which was certainly the approach with the Explorer) However, I have seen it done this way before as an effective solution to the lume bleeding problem.

However, also having slep upon it, I do really like the watch. To me it feels as right as it does wrong. The caseback screws in and out beautifully smoothly as does the crown. More to the point, there appears to be evidence of a disintegrated rubber gasket in the back. Apart from Strela's authority, which is good for me, this would not be not quite as open and shut as you might expect.

Frankly, if I didn't have Strela's authoritative word on this I would be starting to relax about the authenticity. I have played with a couple of Alphas and Seagulls and so I know where the Chinese are with 'homages' and this feels far better than they do. I know that anything can be faked but the amount of engineering, information and care that has gone into this is frankly astonishing for a 'cheaper' watch. If this was a Sub or an Explorer It would make more sense but there can't be much profit in this.

However,

Right now, I need to put together an e-mail to the seller explaining precisely why I think his watch is fake and, while I am convinced by Strela, I'm not sure he will be. So, I'm going into 'Devil's Advocate Mode'. Come on guys , give me the evidence to convince me (and the seller) that this is a fake...

------

So that's the original posts, While there was some response commiserating, there has been little, beyond Strela's authoritative statement, that told me precisely why it was a fake. There are two reasons why I would really like to know far more. One is simply for my own and other's education. The other is that I am going to have to give good reasons for thinking that this is a fake when I attempt to return it. As you can imagine, there is a non trivial amount of money involved here.

So, can anyone help?

[M4tt]

Surely someone must know something?

[Bisquitlips]

Matt,

Post it over on the Watch Out forum here on TRF. There are some great guys that hang out over there and will surely chime in.

Or perhaps the mods can move this post for you.

[WatchTimes]

That is one of the most faked watches out there in the vintage market.

VERY few Red Rangers ever were really made.
The movement is real as is the case I am sure.
The Ranger print doesn't look right, dial doesn't look right.
Its a parts watch, thats what most of them are.

Try doing some google research and I recall finding an article by
a Rolex historian which said he had only seen one real one in his life.

I almost got taken on one but I explained to the seller how I was
more or less (legally) going to make his life living hell and he agreed
to give me a full refund all of the sudden.

I am no guru nor do I claim I know this to be a certain fact BUT
I am pretty sure I am right on here...

And yes, lots of people claim to have real red rangers when in reality they are all older
redials.

Oh yeah... The Rangers are manuals from what I recall as well from the era the supposed red ones are from.

[tudorman8276]

...of BAD NEWS.

...your watch is indeed COUNTERFEIT.

...notice in the pic's, the location of the SN and mdl#. They are CENTERED, top to bottom, with no wording above them.

...this is common on the fakes.

...you will also find, that the SN will be repetitively found on other also. There are a few SN's for this fake Ranger that are repetitively used.

...if you would have started this in the watchout forum, it would have been addressed immediately...I just found your thread.

Sincerely, Stan.

[tudorman8276]

Originally Posted by JYogi

That is one of the most faked watches out there in the vintage market.

VERY few Red Rangers ever were really made.
The movement is real as is the case I am sure.
The Ranger print doesn't look right, dial doesn't look right.
Its a parts watch, thats what most of them are.

Try doing some google research and I recall finding an article by
a Rolex historian which said he had only seen one real one in his life.

I almost got taken on one but I explained to the seller how I was
more or less (legally) going to make his life living hell and he agreed
to give me a full refund all of the sudden.

I am no guru nor do I claim I know this to be a certain fact BUT
I am pretty sure I am right on here...

And yes, lots of people claim to have real red rangers when in reality they are all older
redials.

Oh yeah... The Rangers are manuals from what I recall as well from the era the supposed red ones are from.

...Rgr, once upon a time. Genuine 9050, Red letter. Wish I still had it, but someone convinced me to sell it to them several years ago.

Stan.

[stevemulholland3]

(no offense stan,but I am unsure these where evr really made)
my friend,just because there has been one authenticated by Rolex in no way proves to me that these "Red" Rangers where ever actually made..
I have never found one catalog or pieve of paperwork that specified a red text ranger
and I for one have a hard timne believing these where in fact EVER made by tudor..
from the long discussions I have had with trained rolex watchmakers it is laughable the amount of knowledge that they know about vintage pieces...I started to talk to one and I could just just see the confusion and utter lack of knowledge in his eyes when I talked about rare model tudors/rolex..etc..
and I think one of these could easily slip thru rolex and get a certification as this model is not common..
as has been already stated this one is indeed a counterfiet,but still nice looking..
stan I have no doubt you may have had one,but how do you know it was factory original?
I woulkd love to see some difitive proof on this subject..

[tudorman8276]

Originally Posted by stevemulholland3

(no offense stan,but I am unsure these where evr really made)
my friend,just because there has been one authenticated by Rolex in no way proves to me that these "Red" Rangers where ever actually made..
I have never found one catalog or pieve of paperwork that specified a red text ranger
and I for one have a hard timne believing these where in fact EVER made by tudor..
from the long discussions I have had with trained rolex watchmakers it is laughable the amount of knowledge that they know about vintage pieces...I started to talk to one and I could just just see the confusion and utter lack of knowledge in his eyes when I talked about rare model tudors/rolex..etc..
and I think one of these could easily slip thru rolex and get a certification as this model is not common..
as has been already stated this one is indeed a counterfiet,but still nice looking..
stan I have no doubt you may have had one,but how do you know it was factory original?
I woulkd love to see some difitive proof on this subject..

...well, you have to take my word for it.

...I owned it for several years and the dial appeared to have never been touched.

...the 9050 is the actual Ranger Model. I have seen other models presented as rangers, but in my reference, the ONLY Ranger mdl was the 9050.

...don't know if I still have any pic's of it anymore, but if I do, I will email them to you Steve. It was a fantastic watch-should have kept it along with my pointed 7928. Only other watch I have ever sold that I TOTALLY regret now.

Stan.

[M4tt]

Ooops, sorry, rather than replicate posts, would a kindly mod mind moving this please? Cheers,

Thanks very much to those who have answered. I had pretty well gathered that bad news but just wanted to fill in the details for my own satisfaction.

As it happens, the seller seems to be as mortified as I am and has asked me to return for an immediate refund. As long as this happens then I have had a lucky escape, however, as I seem to be favouring Rolex in my buying habits at the moment a masterclass in what's what would be very useful.

I'll be honest, despite the increasing certainty that it was a wrong 'un, it felt really quite good in a way that the few fakes that I have encountered simply don't. For this reason alone, I hope you will not mind me playing devil's advocate, mostly to help me find out more...

So, I know the movement is definitely a genuine ETA.

On google I haven't seen any other 37mm rangers at all, they all seem to be 34mm. Likewise I really don't have the experience and google hasn't provided anything that suggests that this serial has been repeated.

The serial places the watch squarely in the mid seventies and an earlier, mid sixties Rolex of mine has a serial in approximately the same position and with no writing above it:



Can I have a bit more detail about why the case is dodgy? I have to confess that there is a fair bit of difference between an unsympathetic redial and an out and out fake. Is there any room for doubt here?

[Tools]

M4tt,

I'm not going to move this discussion to Watch-out.....

But, I did retitle it..

The purpose of that Board is not to concentrate all discussion there, but rather, to help guide those who are looking to buy a particular time-piece, or use a particular site..

This discussion on the so called "Red Ranger" has come up on more than one occasion...... It is difficult/impossible to authenticate one because there is nothing except a bit of red on the dial to differentiate it from any other Tudor Ranger; so if they ever did exist, the mainstream has been so deluged with reprinted dials and outright counterfeits, it is likely impossible to ever know for sure. There are, however, some things known about the counterfeits, such as the clean, crisp centered stampings.

At the forefront of this Forum, is education about Rolex and it's offerings.... This is clearly more educational than the typical posts.

We have a pretty extensive database of Tudor specific sites over in our Reference Library.

[CharlieG]

Originally Posted by tudorman8276

...of BAD NEWS.

...your watch is indeed COUNTERFEIT.

...notice in the pic's, the location of the SN and mdl#. They are CENTERED, top to bottom, with no wording above them.

...this is common on the fakes.

...you will also find, that the SN will be repetitively found on other also. There are a few SN's for this fake Ranger that are repetitively used.

...if you would have started this in the watchout forum, it would have been addressed immediately...I just found your thread.

Sincerely, Stan.

Stan,
Is the entire watch counterfeit or is it built from original parts?
Thanks

[tudorman8276]

...is definitely COUNTERFEIT as I indicated earlier, and TOOLs indicated subsequently.

...because of this, the entire watch should be considered suspect.

...aside from the case issue, there has been ongoing discussions about the Ranger models bearing the red letters and/or the white letters, both on these forums and others.

Stan.

[Terry Newton]

The stamping looks totally incorrect for this type of watch. In spite of it being a fake it is a nice looking watch. It would be unethical for the seller, to not give you your money back though, as it is a fake. I would hope that he never tries to pass it off again.

Terry Newton

[M4tt]

Still in devil's advocate mode...

I am happy to accept that the dial is obviously false.

There seems to be a little uncertainty about the case although the consensus seems to be that it is fake. (even though my Royal has essentially the same number setup) and is certainly genuine.

However, the statement that the whole watch is suspect is not terribly convincing and, frankly undermines other authoritative statements about the rest of the watch.

There are three possibilities: the movement is a Chinese fake, the movement is a genuine ETA but not genuine Tudor tuned ETA and that it is genuine.

To my knowledge there are three automatic ETA calibres that are accurately copied by the Chinese: the 2892 (Tianjin ST26) , 2824 Tianjin ST26) and the old Valjoux 7750. This isn't one of those, while the rotor has a passing resemblance to the 2824 it simply isn't one.

However, while the number under the balance says 2784, a quick riffle through an ETA workshop manual shows that this is incorrect and in fact it should be a 2783 as this has the less precise regulation system:



Top - 2783 - note simplified 'lever' regulation

bottom - 2784 - note the far more precise screwed cam regulation

Now this could be a bit of devious Chinese fakery, but frankly as the movement number is stamped under the balance I am inclined to think that the movement is genuine and the mix up occurred in Switzerland, probably due to the specification that Tudor ordered combined with the parts ETA had available. I really don't think that the Chinese would be going to all that trouble. The bottom line is that it is a genuine ETA 278x and that 278x were used by Tudor.

Which brings us to the possibility that it is genuine ETA but not genuine Tudor.
The use of blued screws in the winding bridge, liberal decoration and finishing and a beautifully polished and, I would assume, poised, balance suggest that this has been substantially fettled. I guess that the only way to fake this would be to do it for real. The less sophisticated regulation is a surprise but not that great a surprise.
I would be astonished if a faker would go to all the decorative, finishing and polishing effort for a fake.

My conclusion is that the movement is genuine. This is supported by the fact that it appears to have been serviced several times - light compression damage to the screws, and so on. To me this doesn't feel consistent with the wear to the case but the case does have some wear and the idea that it has been worn carefully and serviced less carefully and suffered minor water ingress is not impossible to imagine.

The points about the movement are simply the facts. However, in devils advocate mode, when someone says that everything, including the movement is fake and the movement is clearly not fake, what should one think about the certainty about the other parts?

I'm not saying that this is in doubt. I'm just putting the devil's advocate case...

[M4tt]

After discussing it with the seller, He offered a full refund. I sent the watch back, he confirmed receipt on Tuesday morning and asked if I could wait until Thursday for the cash. I said 'fine' and by 7am Thursday morning the money was back in my account.

You can't say fairer than that.


Thanks to all who helped, commiserated and supported in one way or another. I really appreciate your Knowledge and good humour when I asked so many dumb questions.

Cheers,

Matt

[tudorman8276]

...sometimes these things do NOT have a happy ending, but obviously, yours did.

...BTB, if you think about purchasing ANY OTHER Rolex or Tudor watch, be sure to post it up here in watchout...and we will TRY to steer you one way or a nutter..

Stan.

[jbox168]

[IMG][/IMG]


Was researching for this watch and came up to this thread. how about this one that is in a japanese pawnshop right now. i asked the seller if its original and he said yes, watch has never been altered and was scrutinized under a scope. watcha guys think?

[swatty]

Originally Posted by jbox168

[IMG][/IMG]


Was researching for this watch and came up to this thread. how about this one that is in a japanese pawnshop right now. i asked the seller if its original and he said yes, watch has never been altered and was scrutinized under a scope. watcha guys think?

Looks to good to be true for me

[padi56]

Afraid the red ranger is one of the most altered dial out there. Myself have never see any real proof that the red rangers ever existed But if I remember James Dowling in a article said he had only seen one model in his life .The only experience I have with the Tudor Ranger over many years is for every genuine one there are many many faked ones like the red rangers.

[Jagatai]

I have seen red rangers for sale from a famous watch dealer, but after a little bit of research I decided not to pursue it further because of the authenticity issues with this particular reference. Same reason whyni would never buy a tiffany marked rolex dial without the actual receipt from tiffanys and Rolex papers. I just cant afford to make a mistake. I read this thread with great interest.

[onkyo]

Originally Posted by jbox168

[IMG][/IMG]


Was researching for this watch and came up to this thread. how about this one that is in a japanese pawnshop right now. i asked the seller if its original and he said yes, watch has never been altered and was scrutinized under a scope. watcha guys think?

I would run .... IMHO none of these red rangers are authentic.

[jupa09]

hello, and because the red did? or counterfeiters or replicators perhaps serves a watch different? are going to take so much trouble to put a machine original eta then stamped in red RANGER? it be that over time many owners repainted red quadrants? as a trend ... I find it illogical that a replica or counterfeit make them so different from the original ... on the basis that many have machine eta 2784.
are saying?

[gianpiseibravo]

Thi is original catalogue with real tudor ranger

[gianpiseibravo]

1974 catalogue

[harry in montreal]

Please show the cover of that catalog.

[themaninblack]

Corporate knowledge at Rolex should know the answer to the reality of a "red Ranger" but much of that knowledge appears to be lost or Rolex won't tell. Rolex didn't keep an original of every Tudor variant they made. Some years back they bought up several rare models at auctions because they did not possess originals in their archive. This was told to me by a major collector who I surmised was the seller of one piece, not a red Ranger though!

[gianpiseibravo]

The only original tudor ranger that exists is whitout red colour! If I find time, I post my tudor ranger with insurance certificate. Now see front and last page of 1974 catalogue.

[gianpiseibravo]

This is my tudor.
What do You think?

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by gianpiseibravo

This is my tudor.
What do You think?

I think it's definitely not red! I like the use of the red composite background.

[docdoowop]

A chance came up for me to buy this watch:


for $600 US, all in, at a local pawnshop.
I asked the guys if it was confirmed as all Genuine. Of course, they dont know enough to give me a satisfactory answer.

Here is a side view:


what do you guy think?