simmons3d

Shouldn't this be a 116520 (seconds at 6) not 16520? Several issues with the dial too. What do you think? http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230428809983

I read the McQueen biography a while back and thought he had given the watch to his son just before he died... Maybe it was a different watch - although in all the photos of him later in life he is wearing a 5512. It's been almost 30 years, I would want some form of documentation if I was forking over the cash for that one.

By the way the other dial photo that had you confused is a fairly rare 16808 gold "nipple" dial. Early to mid 80's I believe.

What if the way to solve the current financial problems is to do nothing? Perhaps the cure during the great depression was the right one? 3 or 4 years of real tough times vs. decades of Japanese style deflation? The people in charge, Bernake and Paulson, seem to be the most clueless of all. You can't lend your way out of a debt problem!

I recently purchased an original 1971 9315 bracelet for a vintage gen 1680 and took it in to the local watchsmith (who also sells numerous used Rolexes) to be installed. They insisted it was a fake (pointing out the folded links as the giveaway) but installed it anyway. They didn't have a clue what they were talking about.

That's not possible since Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier in 1947 and the GMT Master was not introduced until 1954.

That dial is clearly a repaint. The print quality is just a bit sloppy, not to mention the allignment. If you look at the SCOC text on a gen, the "C" in chronometer is just about over the "C" of certified. On that watch the words are a bit too close together and the "C" in chronometer is almost over the "Y" in officially. I wonder if that watch has a "legit" serial number, something in the low 2 million range. I just hope someone doesn't pay 7 grand for it!

I just saw this one too, ebay is just getting full of fake 16610's! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=300119529791

Here's an interesting one. Clearly a fake speedy pro. Not sure why they bother giving the model number of the automatic speedy reduced (3510.50) but then again they have been submerging it so who knows! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=300112378129

Another scammer with a sub: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=330103649535

Here's another one... This one is really rare, a red sub with gold surrounds and a gloss dial! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=140088938629

Looks like some poor sucker took the bait, auction ended with buy it now.

Another day and another shark in the bay... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=330090295952 "Everything on this watch is 100% original Rolex except for the band" Ya right!

I f you're after a collectable piece you can still get lucky and find a decent 5513 Sub in the 3K range. Those will only increase in value and have the classic matte dial. Unfortunately any vintage Sea Dweller is much more than that...

Ben, don't feel too bad, here's why: There is a glaring problem with those other GMT's that Joshua's doesn't seem to have. The font and size of the word "ROLEX" is too small on all those other examples and it sticks out like a sore thumb. Look at a genuine GMT II and you will see the R in ROLEX is over the "E" in OYSTER below it, and the "X" is over the "D" in DATE. Not to mention the crown above ROLEX is also much too small. It appears correctly on Josh's. It was the first thing I noticed. I would go with Josh's GMT if I had the choice of the watches shown. The error in the font size on the others is just too obvious to me.