Rolex 1680 Tiffany & Co.

[mdw3]

I think this thread has outlasted its useful life. OP asks if all looks correct on his Tiffany-signed 1680 Submariner. He then proceeds to inform the readers that he has already checked the validity of the case and movement numbering with his Rolex dealer, and they have given him their full approval. When informed that the Tiffany signature on his dial is not of a typical or accepted type for Rolex watches from this era, he proceeds to ignore and discount these cautions, and again reiterates his desire for a valuation (of a watch that appears to be less than fully authentic), from the very experts whose opinions he has chosen to disregard as "housemade paranoia." So, then, can someone please explain to me the purpose we are serving here? For my part, I can say this will be the last I will post to this member's (self-serving) thread.

Michael

[CrownMe]

^^^ x2

[highcotton]

This one sold for $8300.

http://jewelry.ha.com/itm/timepieces...a/5028-61079.s

[springer]

99% of Rolex dealers are not experts or capable to give an informed opinion on a vintage dial let alone a "Tiffany" marked dial. Most guys here in the vintage section are not well versed in "Tiffany" dials, a few are, and they have responded appropriately. The object of counterfeiters is to counterfeit the item as close as possible to the genuine item. I know "a little" about counterfeiting and the best way to exam this dial would be under high magnification and comparison to a known specimen dial. While the dial in the photos might appear genuine, and without a thorough examination, I don't believe you can say it is genuine - especially if it exhibits attributes of known fake "Tiffany" dials.

Rolex dealers and sales staff are experts at their trade, which is selling watches, not identifying fake dials by craftsman practicing the art of counterfeiting.

If you are shopping for someone to agree with what your dealer told you, you might locate other Rolex dealers where you'll probably receive the same response - which doesn't make the dial genuine.

[QueueCumber]

I like these folks with a handful of posts making expert valuations on Tiffany dials and paranoia....

[Vincent65]

Poor old Tiffany is often a bone of contention isn't she...

[Dr.Timeline]

Of course almost all AD are not vintage experts, thats why I asked you about the Dial.
So you really think the Dial is fake?

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Dr.Timeline

Of course almost all AD are not vintage experts, thats Ehe I asked you about the Dial.
So you really think the Dial is fake?

I don't post in the vintage section a lot and have been told to stay away (by a sensitive member) but this one I have to reply to.

You've received a lot of valued advice regarding your dial and here's my take on it.

A few years ago I walked in to the Tiffany store in NY with a Tiffany branded DJ.

After discussing the authenticity of the watch with the sales people I got escorted upstairs to the main offices and technical department to see the "experts".

They examined the watch closely and told me that there's no way they could tell if it's real or not and without an original Tiffany sales recepit there is no way of knowing.

Furthermore they had no sales records so they couldn't even tell if that specific serial # was sold by them.

So to sum it up, without a Tiffany sales receipt your watch is just one of many Tiffany dials (real or not) floating on the market.

[Dr.Timeline]

Ok thanks, good writed!
Maybe Rolex Center can give me an info about selling this Serial to Tiffany?

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Dr.Timeline

Ok thanks, good writed!
Maybe Rolex Center can give me an info about selling this Serial to Tiffany?

I doubt it but you can always ask, (i have and they said no)

[Dr.Timeline]

Originally Posted by mdw3

I think this thread has outlasted its useful life. OP asks if all looks correct on his Tiffany-signed 1680 Submariner. He then proceeds to inform the readers that he has already checked the validity of the case and movement numbering with his Rolex dealer, and they have given him their full approval. When informed that the Tiffany signature on his dial is not of a typical or accepted type for Rolex watches from this era, he proceeds to ignore and discount these cautions, and again reiterates his desire for a valuation (of a watch that appears to be less than fully authentic), from the very experts whose opinions he has chosen to disregard as "housemade paranoia." So, then, can someone please explain to me the purpose we are serving here? For my part, I can say this will be the last I will post to this member's (self-serving) thread.

Michael

You're sure the stamp is not gen. or the Dial?

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Dr.Timeline

You're sure the stamp is not gen. or the Dial?

Geez, can you read?

[Dr.Timeline]

What you mean? English is not my mother tongue and if I have a question, I can ask. Or not?
Where I can find gen. MK1 Tiffany to compare with?

[Lgear080]

The quality of scans you'll need to compare won't be given to you.

You need a known true piece, yours and a microscope.

[Dr.Timeline]

You are probebly right but it would be enough for me another same piece to look at(without microscope)
Maybe this one:
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/w...2-details.aspx

To me looks the same?!

Some experts here looked and sais straight "off". But can they please show me why?? The watch comes from a Prof.Rolex Dealer(no AD) and if is something wrong, I give back. But I'd like more Infos than just "Off"

[motoikkyu]

One of the reasons that experts will hesitate to tell you EXACTLY how your stamp might be wrong is that this is a frequent question that counterfeiters ask: how can I make my fake better? Take the advice, don't take the advice, that is unimportant, but it is unlikely that you will receive detailed information about a stamp that may or may not be correct.

[sea-dweller]

Love that dial!

[Dr.Timeline]

Motoik, I understand what you mean. But what about we can discuss than here?? Almost nothing!
If someone sais "off", I cant throw the watch out the window. Of course I want to know why and what! If the expert dont want to Tell me, ok, I accept of course. But to me it sounds a bid not serious.
What about the Tiffany from Christies? To me it looks really the same. And the serial is nearly same, Dial, Year also.

[springer]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

Poor old Tiffany is often a bone of contention isn't she...

X2.

That's why I'd want full documentation before I even thought about purchasing one. It is way to easy to add that bit of text to the dial.

[Vincent65]

Originally Posted by springer

X2.

That's why I'd want full documentation before I even thought about purchasing one. It is way to easy to add that bit of text to the dial.

Agreed, it's just sad that the proliferation of 'DIY applied-at-home' jobs surely implies that there must be some genuine ones (without supporting docs), that are now tarred with the same brush

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by Dr.Timeline

You are probebly right but it would be enough for me another same piece to look at(without microscope)
Maybe this one:
http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/w...2-details.aspx

To me looks the same?!

Some experts here looked and sais straight "off". But can they please show me why?? The watch comes from a Prof.Rolex Dealer(no AD) and if is something wrong, I give back. But I'd like more Infos than just "Off"

I'm no expert, but they don't look the same to me....

Then again, I have no idea how much they can vary within a certain standard due to the device that stamps the dial...

[Dr.Timeline]

Thanks for helping QC.
What difference you see? Details?

[omitohud]

Originally Posted by Dr.Timeline

Motoik, I understand what you mean. But what about we can discuss than here?? Almost nothing!
If someone sais "off", I cant throw the watch out the window. Of course I want to know why and what! If the expert dont want to Tell me, ok, I accept of course. But to me it sounds a bid not serious.
What about the Tiffany from Christies? To me it looks really the same. And the serial is nearly same, Dial, Year also.

What they are saying is that, even if this dial is real, the is no way of proving it unless you have a Tiffany sales receipt. Anyone can copy the exact same font and stamp it on the dial, I doubt Tiffany themselves would be able to tell.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by omitohud

What they are saying is that, even if this dial is real, the is no way of proving it unless you have a Tiffany sales receipt. Anyone can copy the exact same font and stamp it on the dial, I doubt Tiffany themselves would be able to tell.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Se post #38

[Im Lauf der Zeit]

For starters, you need to compare it to a known real Tiffany stamped dial. That Christie's lot has no documentation either. The bottom line is a Rolex offered as "Tiffany dial" without the corresponding papers will always be suspect.

[V.lats97nsx]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ROLEX-1680-S...item4d206aad93
Tough call at sub dials doing 3+

[omitohud]

Originally Posted by MonBK

Se post #38

Maybe he doesn't understand due to his English.

To Dr. Timeline. If u like the watch n think it's real then that's all that matter. Wear it in good health.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[southtexas]

Originally Posted by Dr.Timeline

What you mean? English is not my mother tongue and if I have a question, I can ask. Or not?
Where I can find gen. MK1 Tiffany to compare with?

You could look in the vintage rolex forum's dial archive, there might be one or more bonafide examples to compare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lgear080]

consensus is no receipt, impossible to verify.
I've seen many, but there are a lot of stamp variations.

[descartes]

FWIW The Tiffany stamps in post #52 are not even close to being the same.