Is something wrong here with this GMT 16750?

[springer]

To all the sleuths here. Check this GMT 16750 - look everything over very good. Post what you see, what is right, and anything out of the ordinary. Please visit the auction and check the other pics and what is posted about the watch.

I'll post up on it later.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rolex-VINTAGE-Au...item35ac5e7e3d

[robertneville]

the serial number looks like the last 4 digits are not "level" with the first 3.

[TimeToGo]

John,

This looks very interesting.

I think the box is off by 10 years or so. I believe they were using the Green box with mid to late 80s. But this could be due to availability of boxes at the ADs.

I do not know a reference for Country code 904 ?! The 900 series referenced is as follow:
902 - AAFES, Germany
906 - Natex Retail, German NATO Airbase
907 - Rheindalen, German NATO Headquarter

I will have to stare at this little later.

[Too Old]

As a 1987 16750 , should it have a glossy dial with white gold surrounds?
If not, the markers and the hands look far too white to my old eyes!!
The coronet doesn't look to be as elegant as the long one it should be does.
The inside of the case back looks to me, far too pristine.

I'm nervous about posting this as I don't want to look like a complete prat, but hey, why change the habit of a lifetime!!!!

[Nicko]

John, the case is a total FUGAZIE! Fakeeeee as Orchi would say...

[thewelshm]

Man, I dont know how you guys do it I would definately have thought that that watch is authentic??? The movement looks correct though????

thewelshm

[springer]

here are my observations:

1) the box is European and not a USA box. The warranty is in French, not English. USA watches usually didn't come with this box or French warranty papers - but - this GMT was sold through the U.S. military PX system, so they could be correct. It was probably sold overseas, my guess would be Germany.

2) not all country codes, as the 904 indicated here, have been published. I assume it is some type of code for the AAFES or PX military group from the USA. I'm not sure.

3) The watch appears genuine and the dial appears to be the correct vintage dial for an early 1980's matte dial. But, here is what seems strange to me - the warranty paper appears to be dated 1982, which would be correct for a matte-dialed GMT 16750. What is strange is the serial number - which is circa 1986/87, serial number 94XXXXX. So, how could a watch be sold five years before Rolex started using the 94XXXXX series of serial numbers?

The seller states the warranty paper is dated 1987. It appears as "82" to my corrected vision. The date is also written as found in the USA and not in Europe. (Most Europeans place the year first in a date sequence.)

4) So, what we have is a 16750 matte-dialed GMT 16750 which was made at the end of the production run for 16750's. (The gold surround markers on 16750's began showing up circa 1983/84 which replaced the matte dials) GMT 16760's were well into production be then. Personally, as a collector of fine GMT's, this is a strange one, and while all might be possible with Rolex, it would be tough convincing someone that this dial is correct. It could be a replacement dial. Maybe, maybe not.

Here is a magnified version of the dated warranty paper.

[TimeToGo]

I do not see the "2" there. Note the "2" on 29, elongated at the bottom. Not so on the year.

[mike]

John, for what it's worth there was an 87 16750 posted on TZ a while back from the original owner that had a matt dial.

With Rolex strange things can happen, but I agree with you about the rest.

[springer]

Originally Posted by TimeToGo

I do not see the "2" there. Note the "2" on 29, elongated at the bottom. Not so on the year.

Norm, on the warranty paper, the last number does not appear as a "7" but a "2" as highlighted in red on the photo below. I've included the original photo for comparison. It is looped at the top and bottom of that last number. Whatever it is, that is a very, very late production 16750 to be wearing a matte dial.

It would be a nice watch to add to the collection, but it isn't for me. When it comes time to sell someday, it would be too hard convincing a serious collector to this anomaly of a 1987 matte-dialed GMT.

[springer]

Originally Posted by mike

John, for what it's worth there was an 87 16750 posted on TZ a while back from the original owner that had a matt dial.

With Rolex strange things can happen, but I agree with you about the rest.

All is possible Mike, as you noted. But is it probable? The buyer will have to convince himself of that.

[blaine mattison]

just like the extra coronet on the clasp blade, this to will need to
be "romanced"

[harry in montreal]

doesnt the movement also bear a number that should line up with 1982 or maybe 1988? that could settle that the case and the guts belog together. i think dials are too easy to change. this is a real nice watch, and it would have fooled me. is the unever serial number a dealbreaker? harry

[blaine mattison]

i have never know anyone to date a serial number from the movement.
not to say it wasn't tried. your right about the dial being changed out.
personally, i would keep the dial and hands for a "when needed for a restoration"
and go and put the dial that would be more acceptable and much easier
to sell to a top level buyer

[springer]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

doesnt the movement also bear a number that should line up with 1982 or maybe 1988? that could settle that the case and the guts belog together. i think dials are too easy to change. this is a real nice watch, and it would have fooled me. is the unever serial number a dealbreaker? harry

Harry, I don't believe there is a stamp for the movement that would date the watch - unless it was the incorrect vintage movement.

As far as the serial number being a bit uneven, this is not uncommon as I've seen it before. The older watches can have some very poor stampings that look like dremel drill etchings under magnification - LOL.

[Naples09]

Originally Posted by Nicko

John, the case is a total FUGAZIE! Fakeeeee as Orchi would say...

Can you please share why you think the case is fake for those of us trying to learn about vintage Rolex's?

Thanks,

Jim

[Mockingbird]

The two is an illusion created by the line in the paper and the highlighter interceding. Notice the lack of a loop as in the other 2.

[blaine mattison]

Jim, use this for a "example" to come to your own conclusion

the serial numbers show to be made the same year.

[Rolexbroker]

Originally Posted by springer

here are my observations:
(Most Europeans place the year first in a date sequence.)
.

Europeans mostly use the DD/MM/YYYY sequence .
If this was sold in a US Mil PX. the staff filling in the documents could very well be US servicemen and explain the sequence used here .

The year could be 87 or 82 .. it has been written over the stamp (or stamped over )

The 90X is consistent with what would be PX issues

[Flyjet601]

Originally Posted by springer

Norm, on the warranty paper, the last number does not appear as a "7" but a "2" as highlighted in red on the photo below. I've included the original photo for comparison. It is looped at the top and bottom of that last number. Whatever it is, that is a very, very late production 16750 to be wearing a matte dial.

Compare the 2 in question to the other 2 that is clearly visible. They don't look at all the same. The visible 2 is very elongated, where the other 2 has no bottom part.

Looks like a 7 to me......some people like me put a bar thru the middle of the 7.
It could be a service dial which would follow his description of a "original" dial and accounts for the bright markers.
And just one other note is that according to http://www.gmtmasterhistory.com/gmt-...ref_16750.html
The gloss dials started at serial 9XXXXXX..........

[mike]

Originally Posted by springer

All is possible Mike, as you noted. But is it probable? The buyer will have to convince himself of that.

Yep. There would always be an issue.

[Rolexbroker]

Originally Posted by mike

Yep. There would always be an issue.

That is true ,

The more I look at the highlighted date pictures courtesy of Mr. Springer . the more I'm convinced that it is a 7 and not 2 . The elongation imposed by Mr.Springer is far too high and the end of it would indicate a bar trough the center of the 7 .
Look at the sellers history .. he would have spotted the 5 year discrepancy too .
Why not contact this seller and invite him to post a high resolution picture of the 7 or 2 ?
TRF has a certain authority within the community and should also act responsibly because of that .

[DD911]

Whow, correct working!!!!!!

[blaine mattison]

it has to be a seven. the serial number say's so.

[greekbum]

Guys I have been buying selling collecting this particular model since the mid 80's. I bought 1 new and still have it. I posted this on the VRF earlier and just saw this thread. I have truthfully owned over 100 plastic quickset GMT's all before the majority of people had internet,email and really cared about matte glossy gmt 16750.A matte dialed sold new in 1987 I would believe cause the new models were out with the new style dials and everybody wanted the new style as I remember. BUT with an 87 serial # I wont say never but put the odds very very low. If this was still sitting in 87 I am surprised a dealer didnt swap out the dial for the then new style to sell it easier.The dealers in my town did this and also converted 1000's of watches to 2 tone in those days to make a buck also putting Tiffany on the dials some say Rolex did strange things back than and I agree but small dealers did stranger things.

Below is my post on the VRF regarding this

The transitional model GMTs was 1 I collected, bought and sold allot back in the early and mid 90s mainly because they were much cheaper than the subs and I liked them. Back then everybody wanted sapphire crystal or a two tone blue sub were I lived and you couldnt give away a rootbeer GMT. I read allot about serial number ranges for matte dial and such and wanted to share this with the forum. I agree that there might be a RARE example of a matte dial in the 86xx range or higher as I have bought 1 from an original owner (867xx but keep in mind this is rare maybe 5% the others were all new style dials back then. I base this on the watches I personally bought and sold back then long before there was internet, forums and places or people I knew to ask for information.
Between 1991-1996 I had bought over 30 GMT watches plastic QS version (16750). I kept excellent records back than for my insurance agent but had forget I kept a copy until my Mom called me to ask if I wanted this old notebook I had. Well in the notebook were my records of every watch I had bought back then. Over 100 mainly all GMTs and Submariners with a few Sea Dwellers. Back then I would buy any sport model Rolex I could usually for $500-max $1000. My description in my book were new style dial or old style small link or big link, bezel color and serial number. Since I had bought a new 16750 back in the mid 80s I knew there was a difference in the quick set version as an old style dial was available also a new style dial and there was some that didnt say date. I had bought 30 of these between 1991-96 my records show and the serial number range is as follows. Most if not all of these were from original owners, friends, co workers etc and maybe a couple had been serviced.
1. New style dial (wg) without date. The earliest I have is 823xxx and the latest was 836xxx. There was 9 of these.6 with black bezel 3 with red/blue 2 oyster 7 jubilee
2. New style dial with date The earliest was 85xxx and up serial numbers I had. There was 14 of these. 12 with red/blue 2 with black bezel all oyster
3. Then the old style quick set (matte). The earliest I had was 71xxx and the latest I had was an 847XXX. There was 7 of these.3 with black bezel 4 with red/blue 2 jubilee 5 oyster

Hope this helps.

[Dr.Brian]

It looks like a 7 with a line in the middle, not a 2 to me.

[springer]

Thanks Greek.

I went to the web site, http://www.gmtmasterhistory.com/gmt-...ref_16750.html, as posted by flyjet, which read that the matte dials ended around serial number 9xxxxxx. This is not correct and is not accepted by anyone that I know except "the watch broker," who hosts this site and information. Could it be possible, yes, probable - no.

The seller's response to one of my questions is below:

No, they (the warranty paper - edited) are definitely dated 1987. Many people the world over write a “7” with a line through it. I truly have no reason to lie about what is written on the paper. This really is a full original box and papers watch set. It is that simple. Nothing evil or nefarious going on here. Just a watch. I don’t think the hang tag says GMT. I have never seen one that did, either. Don’t know much about hang tags, and the watch is packed away in its boxes in my safe, so I can’t say for sure. Sorry.

This watch has a very late serial number for a matte dial - at least for me and anyone who collects GMT 16750's should know. The seller states the dated papers are 1987. A question regarding the hang tag wasn't answered because the watch was in his safe!!!!!!!

There you go everyone. This thread started with a question from a friend to have me look at this watch as he knew I collected GMTs. Personally, I don't care for unanswered questions to sellers, and watches that aren't wearing dials for the circa when they were issued. Some things can be changed to make it period correct, whether it is or isn't as it stands now. While the watch and accessories seem to be a nice package, maybe it should remain in the seller's safe a while longer until he gets some time to look at it again!

[greekbum]

John,
For me the matte dialed 16750 is questionable (not impossible) after 835xxx. This is based on the watches I have personally owned and all the watches I saw sold *prior to there being an ($$$) in these.The ones with later serials are the minority not the majority. The really rare dial in these is the non date wg version.The 1 that spider cracks.I have owned dozens and again based on the watches I owned the earliest serial number was 823 xxx the latest was 836xxx. A very short run.With this evidence and do your own homework as people havnt looked to swap these back in to make a buck yet!The trend was the new style dial then.Today its dealers that say different as less than 6 years ago nobody cared on these.

[springer]

Originally Posted by greekbum

John,
For me the matte dialed 16750 is questionable (not impossible) after 835xxx. This is based on the watches I have personally owned and all the watches I saw sold *prior to there being an ($$$) in these.The ones with later serials are the minority not the majority. The really rare dial in these is the non date wg version.The 1 that spider cracks.I have owned dozens and again based on the watches I owned the earliest serial number was 823 xxx the latest was 836xxx. A very short run.With this evidence and do your own homework as people havnt looked to swap these back in to make a buck yet!The trend was the new style dial then.Today its dealers that say different as less than 6 years ago nobody cared on these.

Thanks Greek, and I echo your observations. I've owned several myself, and still do!

Below is a pic of some hang tags.

[greekbum]

Nice group you have there John enjoy them and the weekend