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.

Very true, but as a collector I would steer clear of a watch where anything didn't match. I would always worry that I had a frankenwatch!

Its a good idea to check the serial number and make sure it matches the date stamp on the inside back of the caseback. For example a serial number of 1,185,XXX would possibly have a caseback stamped IV/64. The model number should also be present above the date stamp, in this case "5513". A good Rolex serial number chart is at: http://www.rolexsamler.dk/gb_serial_numbers.htm

Check out the date magnification on this beauty. Nice caseback too! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=270071647757

Not sure if I've seen one of these before : http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=260062537349

Here is a real beauty. Someone was willing to pay almost $1200 for this POS! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=280043673429

Rolex 5517 military that has all the same markings as the recent replica. In the Q & A he states it belonged to a veteran, yet it looks new! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=110040892220

Looks all wrong to me, and the seller seems to know it: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=220032992612

The red submariners can be tough to value. So many of them have had newer white dials put in during servicing then later painted over in red. If it has the original matte red dial and hands, with a serial number that matches the style of printing (IE open 6's in depth rating till '71 etc) then they can be worth $5 - $8k US depending on condition, box and papers etc. A good site to check authenticity is doubleredseadweller.com in the red sub sections. Post some pics if you can.

True, and yet that is the inherent problem with ebay. If someone says its a replica the auction gets cancelled right away, while the seller that insists its genuine (despite photos that show otherwise) will usually be left alone. Ultimately its buyer beware, if it seems to good to be true - it probably is.

Here is a beauty. Money back but only if Rolex "certifies" it as un-authentic! http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewIt...em=130022079533