My new 1675 + bracelet questions

[acf321]

I have just bought a 1970 1675 that has a 93150 / 580 end link bracelet, however my next task is to get the correct band / end links as it come from the factory. I feel this one deserves it, given I have the boxes and papers.

I don't have my own photos as the watch is not in my possession, but this is it - feel free to share your thoughts / opinions.

http://www.iconicwatchcompany.com/19...x--papers.html

I own a lovely 13 link 7836 with 382 fixed and links and I have several questions about this, if anyone might be able to help; 1) was the folded link 7836 the actual correct band for this 1970 GMT? 2) what are the correct end links for this band and watch combination? I have read that 382 is a snug fit for a GMT, however 280 may in fact be the correct links, but I can't confirm this. These end links are affixed to the band, so would need Michael Young (or similar) to remove, and then can I even buy 280's if I need them, and from where?, and 3) the 7836 I have has the correct satin finish on the links, but the outer edges (where you can see the folds) are a highly polished finish, the same as on the sides of the clasp. Should the ends of the links be polished, or matte like the rest of the band?

Thanks in advance.

[Qinhan]

I'm sure the GMT experts will chime in soon regarding your questions. I just wanted to say congratulations on a very nice watch. A true classic.

[Gina Marie]

382 i think are tudor ends. 7836 did come on the 1675 as well as the c&i among others. There is a bracelet chart on this site somewhere that has all you need. Nice watch. Thick lugs. Tags....paperwork .... what more do you need? Did you see the caseback? Is the caseback date stamped?

[acf321]

ok thanks for that, I will see what I can find in terms of the band info on here. I did not see the case back, should I expect that this will have a date inside the case back? I have seen some that are, and others that are not date stamped ... perhaps they only did that for a time and then stopped????

[Gina Marie]

They stopped stamping after 73. Yours should have a stamp. If it does not then it is replaced. Thay are hard to find and costly. Ask Mike to send you a pic.

[Gina Marie]

I am not here to rain on your parade but this forum is about knowledge. Based on your serial number i am not sure your dial is "appropriate" for your watch. I think you should have a mark 2 dial. Here you go:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=74976

I am in no way an expert but Springer is so if you have questions he is the GMT Yoda

[Gina Marie]

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=347108

There are some bracelet charts in the link above.

[springer]

Originally Posted by Gina Marie

They stopped stamping after 73. Yours should have a stamp. If it does not then it is replaced. Thay are hard to find and costly. Ask Mike to send you a pic.

1972 was the last year for case back stamps.

2.9 million GMT serial numbers are considered well within Mark II territory - at least for me and many others.

[Gina Marie]

My apologies. Noted.

[acf321]

Gina, Springer and others many thanks for raising these points. I have emailed Mike and will see what he says.

[Michael M.]

Hi Adam, just emailed you regarding the questions.

The MK1 dial is original and perfectly acceptable for a 2.9mil serial 1675. Here are a few other examples.

http://sheartime.com/product/1970-ro...ter-ref-1675-2

http://sheartime.com/product/1971-ro...ter-ref-1675-2

http://www.hqmilton.com/watches/1971...5-mark-i-dial4

http://www.hqmilton.com/watches/1970...5-mark-i-dial6

[acf321]

Thanks Michael, this is great info and seems to overwhelmingly support the Mk1 face question. Thanks too for arranging to send me the picture of the case back stamped '71.

Can't wait to get this beauty!

[lee fowler]

Hi Adam, a 1675 from 1970 could have come with a 6636 bracelet especially if it was a UK supplied watch.

[lee fowler]

Originally Posted by acf321

I have just bought a 1970 1675 that has a 93150 / 580 end link bracelet, however my next task is to get the correct band / end links as it come from the factory. I feel this one deserves it, given I have the boxes and papers.

I don't have my own photos as the watch is not in my possession, but this is it - feel free to share your thoughts / opinions.

http://www.iconicwatchcompany.com/19...x--papers.html

I own a lovely 13 link 7836 with 382 fixed and links and I have several questions about this, if anyone might be able to help; 1) was the folded link 7836 the actual correct band for this 1970 GMT? 2) what are the correct end links for this band and watch combination? I have read that 382 is a snug fit for a GMT, however 280 may in fact be the correct links, but I can't confirm this. These end links are affixed to the band, so would need Michael Young (or similar) to remove, and then can I even buy 280's if I need them, and from where?, and 3) the 7836 I have has the correct satin finish on the links, but the outer edges (where you can see the folds) are a highly polished finish, the same as on the sides of the clasp. Should the ends of the links be polished, or matte like the rest of the band?

Thanks in advance.

Your bracelet has fixed end links and I am not sure if they can be removed and replaced with 280's. 280's do pop up for sale occasionally but not very often and they would be correct for a 7836 for a GMT

[springer]

Originally Posted by Gina Marie

I am not here to rain on your parade but this forum is about knowledge. Based on your serial number i am not sure your dial is "appropriate" for your watch. I think you should have a mark 2 dial. Here you go:

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=74976

I am in no way an expert but Springer is so if you have questions he is the GMT Yoda

Let me clarify my last post regarding the Mark II dials. As Morgan noted in his post, 2.9 million serial numbers are within the Mark I range. Mark II dials started to appear in the higher 2 million range - I have seen them as low as 2.7 million, but at 2.9 million, Mark I or Mark II would be correct. Orchi's thread on GMT dials was written several years ago, and by him stating the Mark II dials appeared in the low 2 million serial number range is not the case as Mark I dials were used up to and around the 3 million serial range.

There are transition periods for many dial variations whether it be a GMT, Submariner, Explorer, Sea Dweller etc.

[acf321]

Originally Posted by springer

Let me clarify my last post regarding the Mark II dials. As Morgan noted in his post, 2.9 million serial numbers are within the Mark I range. Mark II dials started to appear in the higher 2 million range - I have seen them as low as 2.7 million, but at 2.9 million, Mark I or Mark II would be correct. Orchi's thread on GMT dials was written several years ago, and by him stating the Mark II dials appeared in the low 2 million serial number range is not the case as Mark I dials were used up to and around the 3 million serial range.

There are transition periods for many dial variations whether it be a GMT, Submariner, Explorer, Sea Dweller etc.

Fantastic information Springer, and thanks for posting this. Whilst I am not a vintage expert, I am learning a lot thanks to yours, Michael's, Gina's and others really valuable inputs on here.

Perhaps another question worthy of raising at this juncture is, is there a preferred or more desirable and therefore more valuable dial, when selecting mk1 or mk2 and so-on. For example, is a very late series Mk1 dial more or less valuable / desirable than say an early mk2 dial etc. I have seen some GMT's trading for monstrous sums of money (as in $30k++) and I wonder if that is just due to gilt dials, early specimens, or massive patina?

Thanks all, thoroughly interesting reading.

[acf321]

Originally Posted by lee fowler

Hi Adam, a 1675 from 1970 could have come with a 6636 bracelet especially if it was a UK supplied watch.

Thanks Lee, to be clear this watch was sold new out of HK in 1970 when the US domiciled Family toured there for holidays. I will be the second owner of this watch, with Michael having sourced it directly from that Family.

[acf321]

Quick update here for those of you that asked.

I now have the photo of the case back, and we did confirm (from Springer, Michael and Gina's intel) that the watch is correct to have a Mk1 dial for it's year. We saw many other watches at this age, or even after it that properly appears to support this, and these are all very respectable vendors.

Here is the case back, date stamped 11/71. I am not entirely sure about these things, but i keep reading that a certain year model rolex especially in the older days that were built from an amalgamation of parts from around the same time. This does not apparently mean much, I believe.

Of course, i'm in the very early stages of learning all this, so i'm like a sponge right at the minute. I do however think this is a sickness, as i've just bought my 2nd vintage in so many weeks and am on the hunt for #3 ... when will this disease subside?

[Qinhan]

Originally Posted by acf321

#3 ... when will this disease subside?

It won't.

[michael067]

I'll check mine when I get home, I have a folded link 4/70 on my 72 1675. I've posted pics as well on threads from a few months ago.

[acf321]

does anyone know the dimensional differences between the 280 /380 and 382 end pieces? i know the 382 was a tudor part, but other than name is it the same as the other two in terms of fitment?

[Michael M.]

280's are attached to the bracelet via the spring bars, whereas 380's are simply attached (built in) to the bracelet. Slightly difficult to explain without pictures, so I've included some.

Here is a 9315 with 280's



And a 9315 with 380's

[Filipão]

Originally Posted by Michael M.

280's are attached to the bracelet via the spring bars, whereas 380's are simply attached (built in) to the bracelet. Slightly difficult to explain without pictures, so I've included some.

Here is a 9315 with 280's



And a 9315 with 380's

Mike, thanks for the perfect and clear images/explanations. Am I wrong to assume 380s preeceed 280s?

Also were there any Tudor 79090 (9315) with 580 ends ex-factory?

Thank you so much!