The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 20 April 2008, 11:00 PM   #1
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
Icon4 GMT-MASTER ll "misprint" and new 3186 movement

I am quoting Billy (TRF member name):

Baselworld 2008 Update on GMT-MASTER ll "misprint"

"...I confirmed at the Rolex both 4.4.08 with a Rolex rep. The truth of the matter is that the movemets of the watches with the dials that are missing the roman numerals actually contain the new GMT II movement (3186) as is found in the "ceramic" GMT II (reference 116710). Rolex put the new movements into the "old" (16710) to test the movement prior to putting it in the new case.... So the answer is that it is not a mistake, but an intentional variation so that Rolex could monitor more easily the new movement prior to releasing the 116710. They are obviously rare and limited. Sorry again for the bad information earlier..."

So the hypothesis is that all GMT-MASTER ll instead of Roman "II" actually contain the 3186 movement; thus, ll is not a misprint but, instead, a way to know that the new 3186 movement is inside the old case.
Carlos (Mandrake - TRF member) has confirmed a few days ago that his new Pepsi has the 3186 mechanism but he doesn't mention the dial print.

So, what do you think and most importantly what do you know?
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:24 PM   #2
SPACE-DWELLER
"TRF" Member
 
SPACE-DWELLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Bo
Location: Denmark
Watch: Rolex, of course!
Posts: 22,515
Well, I would tend to doubt that hypothesis since the || versus II print has existed long before Rolex introduced the Cal. 3186.
__________________
With kind regards, Bo

LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...
SPACE-DWELLER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:25 PM   #3
BillA
2018 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Posts: 1,099
It's possible

It is clear that Rolex used atleast 2 different fonts for the "2" in the 16710 GMT II. One appears to be roman numeral markers (for lack of a better description) and the other seems to be parallel sticks (for lack of a better description).

I am not sure you can make a conclusion that one of the styles has the 3186 and the other does not.

I have another thought on it........My 16710 Pepsi came with the newer Users Manual, the one for the GMTIIC. At first I thought the AD or Rolex mixed up the manuals, I am beginning to think it was on purpose because my watch may very well have the 3186 in it (no wiggle, and Z7xxxxxx serial number). so another theory is that if you have a 16710 with the newer manual, you may have the 3186. But then again, the sure way is to crack open the back.
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:29 PM   #4
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
This is also plausible.....
I 'll give an update to this issue tomorrow once I get mine at hands, a new M-series Pepsi...

1) Wiggle test...and...
2) Manual...
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:34 PM   #5
SPACE-DWELLER
"TRF" Member
 
SPACE-DWELLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Bo
Location: Denmark
Watch: Rolex, of course!
Posts: 22,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface View Post
(...)

1) Wiggle test...and...
2) Manual...
Why does this sound dirty??

__________________
With kind regards, Bo

LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...
SPACE-DWELLER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:37 PM   #6
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
....Maybe cause YOU have a dirty mind Bo ???????

I mean, who would ever think this way??
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:38 PM   #7
SPACE-DWELLER
"TRF" Member
 
SPACE-DWELLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Bo
Location: Denmark
Watch: Rolex, of course!
Posts: 22,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface View Post
....Maybe cause YOU have a dirty mind Bo ???????

I mean, who would ever think this way??
Wiggle test:

__________________
With kind regards, Bo

LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...
SPACE-DWELLER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:40 PM   #8
BillA
2018 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Posts: 1,099
Hey Bo

Hey Bo

What do you think about the theory of the newer manual being included with the 16170 / 3186 movement vs. the old manual?
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:42 PM   #9
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER View Post
Wiggle test:

__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:43 PM   #10
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillA View Post
Hey Bo

What do you think about the theory of the newer manual being included with the 16170 / 3186 movement vs. the old manual?
BillA, does the new manual has significant changes that apply strictly to the new 3186 movement?
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:46 PM   #11
BillA
2018 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Posts: 1,099
manual

No, because the operation of the hands is the same.
But it does reference "ceramic" bezel which the 16710 does not have, and it talks about the blue spring.

I just swopped mine, for an older manual, not sure I should have, may also get another manual, just in case.

I am interested to see what manual comes with your M serial
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:47 PM   #12
SPACE-DWELLER
"TRF" Member
 
SPACE-DWELLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Bo
Location: Denmark
Watch: Rolex, of course!
Posts: 22,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillA View Post
Hey Bo

What do you think about the theory of the newer manual being included with the 16170 / 3186 movement vs. the old manual?
I am thinking that Rolex might have run out of the old brochures. And producing new ones would be both financially and environmentally unwise.
__________________
With kind regards, Bo

LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...
SPACE-DWELLER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:47 PM   #13
TempoKing
2018 Pledge Member
 
TempoKing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Anastasios
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Watch: 1915 Rolex
Posts: 8,039
The test means really nothing, I performed the wiggle..lol..and it does wiggle...the good part is that the movement is 3186 on my new M serial 16710 pictured below...and soon to be sold for 4100...ONLY..(am I going to regret this sale..?).
As far as the story about...Rolex put the new movements into the "old" (16710) to test the movement prior to putting it in the new case.. ...I do not think that Rolex S.A. would sell a watch as a test mule in order to make sure that another (116710) works perfect .....somehow through the years I found that you are never sure 100% with this company about numbers, calibers, cases, design etc.

__________________
Rolex and ..Flying, Diving, Exploring, Sailing, Driving - I feel complete.
TempoKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:49 PM   #14
2careless
"TRF" Member
 
2careless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne, AU
Watch: Pepsi
Posts: 4,391
I think our discussions on the 3185/6 are futile without Rolex disclosing their production reasons. While not trying to sound negative, I'm not quite sure about Billy's motive in writing those 2 posts (I did read it like 2 weeks ago). It's plausible but I would give more credence if it were posted by other trusted TRF experts.

P.S. I did get the new GMT2c booklet for my M series pepsi.
2careless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:50 PM   #15
BillA
2018 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Posts: 1,099
3186 movement?

TempoKing
Did you crack open the case back to look at the movement?
Which booklet did you get? Old or new?
Sorry for dumb question.
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2008, 11:59 PM   #16
TempoKing
2018 Pledge Member
 
TempoKing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Anastasios
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Watch: 1915 Rolex
Posts: 8,039
..Crack it..????...lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillA View Post
TempoKing
Did you crack open the case back to look at the movement?
Which booklet did you get? Old or new?
Sorry for dumb question.
Yes, I opened the case, I did the wiggle, I looked at the II straight or Roman but the ultimate test was to open the case..so I did.....3186......Oh, and the booklet is the old one
__________________
Rolex and ..Flying, Diving, Exploring, Sailing, Driving - I feel complete.
TempoKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 12:01 AM   #17
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER View Post
I am thinking that Rolex might have run out of the old brochures. And producing new ones would be both financially and environmentally unwise.

Oh you cynical/realist thinker....you make every mystery evaporate
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 12:05 AM   #18
BillA
2018 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Posts: 1,099
thanks

thanks TempoKing

Well there goes my theory about the newer manual for the 3186 movement if you got the older manual!
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 12:13 AM   #19
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
I like the fact that we take things too seriously with theory-building, testing and falsification...and over and over to a new theory proposal....it reminds me of academic research process
Big credit to all researchers here
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 12:26 AM   #20
sheldonsmith
2018 Pledge Member
 
sheldonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Member 202♛
Posts: 1,590
I have some examples and info on this posted at http://www.minus4plus6.com/paracromblu16710.htm

-Sheldon
__________________

Twitter | Facebook
sheldonsmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 12:28 AM   #21
Hamilton Carvalho
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,229
We love the mistery, don't we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarface View Post
I like the fact that we take things too seriously with theory-building, testing and falsification...and over and over to a new theory proposal....it reminds me of academic research process
Big credit to all researchers here
Hamilton Carvalho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 12:31 AM   #22
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheldonsmith View Post
I have some examples and info on this posted at http://www.minus4plus6.com/paracromblu16710.htm

-Sheldon
Thanks Sheldon

This clears lots of the dust on this issue
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 12:40 AM   #23
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamilton Carvalho View Post
We love the mistery, don't we?
Hehe, yes we do
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 01:06 AM   #24
CPTL
"TRF" Member
 
CPTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Kevin
Location: Texas on my mind
Watch: Sub Date; SS/WG DJ
Posts: 2,461
Confirmed?

From your post, it sounds like the stick-dial as an indicator of the 3186 is still a theory. I am skeptical that the mysterious Rolex Rep knows anything, as those guys routinely seem to be be as clueless as the rest of us.

So is it still a theory?

One thing that would deflate that theory is that no M-serial Exp-IIs have been noted with a stick dial, while they are almost certainly fitted with the 3186. My Exp-II is losing only 1.5 seconds per day, consistent for five days.
__________________

16610 Submariner Date; D Serial
16234 DateJust SS with WG Fluted Bezel & Jubillee, White Roman Dial; F Serial
16570 Explorer II White Dial; M Serial

And Hers: 78240 Mid-Size DateJust SS with Domed Bezel & Oyster, White Roman; D Serial
CPTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 01:12 AM   #25
BillA
2018 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Posts: 1,099
Yep, a theory

Yes, I think the stick dial vs. the roman dial is a theory.

I was getting my hopes up that if you got the new booklet with the 16710, you had a 3186 inside, nope, that theory is out the window.

Also seems the wiggle test is out the window, too. One poster above said his 16710 did wiggle, opened it up and was a 3186 under the hood.

I think we all may be wasting our time on this one, me included, if you want to know for sure go to an AD and have them crack open the case back. As far as that, I am not doing that to my piece, it runs, dead on.
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 01:14 AM   #26
Hamilton Carvalho
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,229
I called the RSC in New York last week to question them wheather or not the GMT II M Series comes with the 3186 movement. The supervisor of the technical department told me that the only way to find that out is by opening the watch. As soon as I receive mine I'll take it to Rolex to end the mistery.
Hamilton Carvalho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 01:16 AM   #27
acce1999
"TRF" Member
 
acce1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: GMT+1
Posts: 2,721
Interesting. So the 24 h hand did move whilst changing timezones? I do not remember if it was sheldonsmith or tahoeblue that concluded that the wiggle test is not enough to conclude that you have a 3186. What most likely is true is that IF the 24 h hand do NOT move you can be pretty certain (but not totally ;-)) you have the 3186, but if it moves you can have the 3185 OR the 3186, as obviously proven by TempoKing. So "non-wiggle" = 3186, "wiggle" = says nothing...

Just to make sure though. The minute hand seems to wiggle slightly on both 3186 and 3185, whilst the 24 h hand seems to be absolutely still.

Perhaps I have to pop my M-serial ExII (with no wiggle) open anyway... I am curious on the possibility to find more facts.

What I do have hard to believe is Rolex "testing" the 3186 in a series of 16710 before rolling them out in 116710. In that case they should have rolled them out a year or so before the 18k GMT-IIc was launched (which was first to use the 3186), and if that was the case this issue would have been discussed a long time ago, having 16710s from 2005 or so equipped with 3186.

Best,

A
acce1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 01:18 AM   #28
Scarface
"TRF" Member
 
Scarface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Minas
Location: London UK
Watch: Rolex , Omega
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillA View Post
... if you want to know for sure go to an AD and have them crack open the case back. As far as that, I am not doing that to my piece....
Me neither...I love this watch anyway...
__________________
Rolex Oyster Perpetual GMT-Master ll
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual Datejust
Omega Seamaster Professional Chronograph
Scarface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 01:22 AM   #29
CPTL
"TRF" Member
 
CPTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Kevin
Location: Texas on my mind
Watch: Sub Date; SS/WG DJ
Posts: 2,461
It's likely not a "testing" issue. There is no reason for Rolex to make two versions of the same movement. Once they put the 3186 into full production, and they used up all the 3185s, all GMT-IIs and Exp-IIs were probably fitted with the 3186.
__________________

16610 Submariner Date; D Serial
16234 DateJust SS with WG Fluted Bezel & Jubillee, White Roman Dial; F Serial
16570 Explorer II White Dial; M Serial

And Hers: 78240 Mid-Size DateJust SS with Domed Bezel & Oyster, White Roman; D Serial
CPTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2008, 01:26 AM   #30
springer
2018 DAYTONA Pledge Member
 
springer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: jP
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT-MASTER
Posts: 13,657
Sheldon, that was some great info...you da man!
springer 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


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





Copyright 2004-2018, 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.