The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Classifieds > WatchOut!!!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 6 September 2018, 07:28 PM   #1
Acanthurus
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 27
Something not right with 116719BLRO

Hi,

I’m very new to this, so please forgive me if I am completely wrong here. I have been looking at GMT master II’s and noticed that the date window on this one looks different (smaller magnification). I have attached a picture of another watch of the same model from the same seller to show the difference. Am I missing something here or is there a reason the date windows look so different between these watches?
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg D22BE0D0-B116-4BD5-B758-5427ECA2EC31.jpeg (189.2 KB, 359 views)
File Type: jpeg 11FFE214-B9D4-4BF7-B00B-9A0C29EB9045.jpeg (196.5 KB, 353 views)
Acanthurus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 September 2018, 07:33 PM   #2
dan993
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Kings Bromley
Posts: 444
Top one doesn't seem right to me but I'm a novice so let somebody chip in with a more experienced opinion.
dan993 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 September 2018, 07:43 PM   #3
freefly
"TRF" Member
 
freefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Eric
Location: AZ
Watch: 4&5-digit Sub/GMTs
Posts: 1,974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acanthurus View Post
Am I missing something here or is there a reason the date windows look so different between these watches?
Yep, it's a known issue. There were crystals being supplied to Rolex for a time with lower-than-normal magnification on the cyclops.


In other cases, the date magnification can sometimes look "off" depending on the distance and focal length of the lens being used.
freefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 September 2018, 08:01 PM   #4
HL65
TRF Moderator & 2024 Patron
 
HL65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Ken
Location: SW Florida
Watch: One on my wrist.
Posts: 63,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by freefly View Post
Yep, it's a known issue. There were crystals being supplied to Rolex for a time with lower-than-normal magnification on the cyclops.


In other cases, the date magnification can sometimes look "off" depending on the distance and focal length of the lens being used.
Exactly
__________________

SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT
HL65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 September 2018, 10:12 PM   #5
Gtecko
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Halifax
Posts: 518
I would question that too ! I learned something new today :)
Gtecko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 September 2018, 10:53 PM   #6
MKLM
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: Matt
Location: Florida
Watch: GMT IIc
Posts: 90
Here is a thread on the issue. Looks like it was prevalent around 2014.https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=378176
MKLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 September 2018, 03:56 AM   #7
dan993
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Kings Bromley
Posts: 444
If I'm ever in the market for a WG Pepsi then at least I know now
dan993 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 September 2018, 05:44 AM   #8
uncleluck
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: England
Posts: 518
Who’s the seller? Can’t imagine anyone selling such an expensive Watch providing such horrible pictures...
uncleluck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 September 2018, 06:49 AM   #9
Onikage
"TRF" Member
 
Onikage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Watch: 16710, 16628
Posts: 7,755
Wouldn't deter me but I'm glad Rolex sorted it. Looks aftermarket, but isn't. ..Well it might be.
__________________
GMT II 16710 TRADITIONAL
( D- Serial #)
ROLEXFANBOY P-Club Member #4
Onikage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 September 2018, 01:46 PM   #10
GLADIATOR
"TRF" Member
 
GLADIATOR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Adam
Location: Costa Blanca,
Watch: YMII,GMTII,DAYTONA
Posts: 5,288
Known issue or not, and based on your one poor photo.
Act with extreme caution

2nd photo - ALL looks good - 1st photo NOT!
A
__________________
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. Winston Churchill
"We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done."
GLADIATOR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8 September 2018, 12:46 AM   #11
Acanthurus
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 27
Thanks all. A bit surprising to hear that Rolex let these through their quality control. If I had paid that much I’m not sure I would be happy getting one with a lame cyclops.

Sorry for the bad photos. These are extreme close ups from those advertised as the seller has a very good reputation and I suspected there would be a logical explanation without unfairly tarnishing their record. I was therefore trying to avoid any clearly identifiable clues from the photos.

Once again thanks for everyone’s insight!
Acanthurus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.