ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
16 October 2019, 02:59 PM | #31 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Real Name: Nig
Location: nyc/nj
Watch: Me do my thing
Posts: 162
|
Super fake
|
16 October 2019, 03:34 PM | #32 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New Zealand
Watch: 114060
Posts: 2,630
|
If not sure, don't buy.
Regarding the hand/dial lume mismatch, that is common and due to service hands having been installed while keeping the dial original. As far as I can tell service hands are the least of this watch's problems. Looks like some polishing "professional" really went to town on the crown guards. |
16 October 2019, 03:46 PM | #33 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Monaro, NSW
Posts: 846
|
|
16 October 2019, 03:48 PM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Monaro, NSW
Posts: 846
|
Is this Submariner correct?
|
16 October 2019, 06:58 PM | #35 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,659
|
It's alive!!!!!!!!!!
|
16 October 2019, 07:12 PM | #36 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: Gabriel
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,816
|
How is this a 5512 dial? It has a date window and 1000ft/300m.
Looks like a 16800 to me with perhaps a well polished case or photo from poor angel.
__________________
1680 1675 16800 16570 16710 17000 16613 17013 Gone but not forgotten 16610LV 1016 16234 |
16 October 2019, 07:12 PM | #37 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Watch: GMT
Posts: 3,486
|
I think it's a frankenwatch using a fake case and a hash-bash of some genuine parts from a few era's.. I could be wrong though.
|
16 October 2019, 07:17 PM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: N/A
Posts: 29
|
So where are the real experts in this forum?
|
16 October 2019, 10:22 PM | #39 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 6,010
|
gotta be a matt dial 16800!!, CG look polished, a couple of small chips around the cyclops but don't see anything wrong here, nice dial, nice insert. There is no way (except with x-ray vision that works through a computer screen) to call out that case as either fake or "5513 case with ground crown guards"
|
16 October 2019, 11:06 PM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Real Name: Pete
Location: Toronto, Canada
Watch: 1016.
Posts: 687
|
Ever since I read that monster WUS thread about Gineault and TC Subs, I've been wary of five-digit date models. Dunno about THIS one though, I only know the models I wear...which are all four-digit refs
|
16 October 2019, 11:28 PM | #41 | ||
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Empire State
Watch: 1966 Rolex 5513
Posts: 3,414
|
Quote:
What's fake? The whole thing? The dial appears to be an early 80s 16800 matte dial, and the case looks heavily polished. Hands aren't original, nor, likely, the crystal. Why? Quote:
|
||
17 October 2019, 12:33 AM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Real Name: Nig
Location: nyc/nj
Watch: Me do my thing
Posts: 162
|
I’m sorry for calling it a fake it’s definitely a Frankenstein/ put together watch percent
|
17 October 2019, 12:35 AM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Real Name: Nig
Location: nyc/nj
Watch: Me do my thing
Posts: 162
|
Come to think of it it’s just a nyc 47th streeet diamond district special lol
|
17 October 2019, 02:17 AM | #44 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Aaron
Location: CT/NYC
Watch: ing the time!
Posts: 6,789
|
That's a matte dial 16800 from the early '80s, and it doesn't appear fake, although we'd need more photos and a look at the movement to confirm. Insert is correct, and has the tell-tale pumpkin patina on the pearl, which is common on this reference.
Crown guards have been over-polished, but otherwise I think it looks pretty good. I don't understand the OP's question, though .... Just looks like a little dirt around the cyclops. Not saying that it's an amazing example of a 16800, but we should be careful labeling watches as "fake" if you're not sure. This stuff stays online and can confuse guys who are researching this model later on. Here's another legit example of a 16800 with matte dial. |
17 October 2019, 12:01 PM | #45 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Real Name: George
Location: Sydney
Watch: 5513
Posts: 1,104
|
|
17 October 2019, 12:46 PM | #46 |
2024 ROLEX DATE-JUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Real Name: Sink-O!
Location: a praire in AZ
Watch: ROLEX-less atm...
Posts: 14,007
|
Well, it looks weird anyways ~ !
__________________
*Positive Waves Baby* Lug Hole Loyalist / Chamfer Line Inspector INFORTHE WIN 289
|
17 October 2019, 05:15 PM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Watch: 14270 Explorer
Posts: 108
|
Looks like a 16800 to me.
Nothing wrong with the crown guards in my opinion. I think the lighting is playing tricks on us a little bit. They're polished but not unusually short. |
17 October 2019, 06:18 PM | #48 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Australia
Watch: eclectic..
Posts: 191
|
Maybe if you want an expert opinion you should ask an expert and not post here... or not...
|
17 October 2019, 07:45 PM | #49 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 356
|
Quote:
I personally admit being confused by the cyclop magnification/size but that’s it. Of course crown guards are dead but that’s probably not what the OP was concerned about. |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.