freddy333

A couple things - For 1 thing, always take what a rep seller says with a huge grain of salt. At best, it is exaggerated marketing hyperbole, at worst, outright lies. That said, regardless of sellers' claims & contrary to anecdotal reports of (less than $1,000) rep watches being fitted with 'solid' gold links, every rep watch in my experience has been plated or flashed with a very thin layer of a poor quality gold on top of another metal (usually, steel). If the plating is scratched or wears away, the underlying base metal becomes visible. Over time, polishing or just the natural oils from your skin tend to wear the gold away. How long the gold will last depends on a number of variables like the quality of the gold used for the plating, the condition of the underlying metal, how well the underlying metal was prepared prior to having the plating applied, how often the watch is worn, whether the environment is humid or not, how often & with what materials the watch is cleaned and/or polished, etc. I have seen the plating on expensive rep watches begin to wear away in as little as 3-4 weeks or last as long as a couple of years. Because of this, it is generally recommended that if you plan to keep the watch, avoid gold altogether (that includes gold in the form of two-tone watches as well). If you absolutely must have a gold watch, try to avoid polishing it.....at least with anything abrasive & wash it often with a mild (non-abrasive) cleaner & a soft cloth. And keep your fingers crossed (with your hand in your pocket).

Dead dots of tritium

5-star (meaning excellent) collector.

I am better with vintage models & it is impossible to say with any certainty at that distance, but from what I can see (& with that type of pictures (distant)), it looks like a rep.

I disagree, somewhat, from the previous responses. Where I disagree is that I think the EXII is a pretty good rep. Is it an exact copy? No. But I think it is close enough so that only a knowledgeable Rolex collector will know. The average guy on the street (that includes the average gen owner, who typically knows NOTHING) would never know it is a rep. However, there is no question that the gen is a far better watch in terms of fit & finish, not to mention overall construction quality. If you view both the gen & rep side-by-side, the differences, to the knowledgeable eye, are quite apparent. The bottom line is that if you can afford the gen (regardless of the economy), get the gen. If not, familiarize yourself with the details of the gen & search out the rep version that contains the inaccuracies that offend YOU the least.

I do not have the hand sizes for either, but the movement in the 16520 was a modified Zenith (Rolex calibre 4030), while the movement in the current 116520 is Rolex's in-house calibre 4130. Completely different movements, so I doubt the hands would be interchangeable. However, both sets of hands for the 116520 -- the original narrow & the later/current wide -- ARE interchangeable since the movement is the same.

This 1, which I believe is the same as the DW in the upper right in the other picture (which looks closest to me), looks the best. The Tudor font is tall, rounded & narrow. It is also serifed, which none of the options you posted appear to be. But if I saw this 1 in your watch, I would probably assume it is gen.

You might want to start with the stickies at the top of the Rolex forum......like this 1. Then use the Search to find whatever additional info you need.

I would not concern yourself with the color or brightness of the metal since the differences are small, vary depending on age & condition & are only evident when you have 2 bracelets side-by-side for comparison. But having polished parts that did not come that way from the factory will definitely raise suspicion & this is something that most collectors will be able to detect from quite a distance.

Flex - the only parts that should be polished (shiny) are the sides of the cover & the 2 flat parts of the clasp. The rest of the bracelet & end links should be given a fine satin (brushed) finish with a Bergeon 5444-A (there are other options, but the Bergeon comes closest to the original Rolex factory finish)

I hope the arrivals exceeded the departures............ A pair of model-correct, gen folded links & still wearing the 1 on the right Saturday night

Reluming hands is easy enough that most people can do it with just a bit of practice. I find it easier to remove the existing/old lume either by running the hands through an ultrasonic or, if you do not have that, a can of spray paint remover will do just as well. Follow the instructions on the paint remover can, but do a final clean with denatured alcohol (mineral spirits, which you can get from most hardware stores). Apply the new lume to the back of the hand using a toothpick. I simply coat the end of the toothpick with a drop of lume & then, beginning at the tip of the hand, run the side (not the tip) of the toothpick down the back of the hand until you reach the bottom of the lume hole. If the lume does not cover the entire hole after the 1st swipe, let it dry a bit & repeat until you reach the desired result. Reluming dials, on the other hand, is difficult & requires special skill. Unless you are an artist, I would not waste time practicing. Just let someone like Ziggy do the work for you.

You mean this lumpy old thing?

The watch in Stefano Mazzariol's animation is the gen I modeled my 6542 project after Stefano, by the way, is 1 of the authors of the book "ROLEX DAYTONA - A Legend is Born".

Nice pair, JoJo. It looks like Christmas is beginning early there.

I think the lack of pics & wrong booklet is a tactic used by some high end dealers to weed out the punters from the serious buyers. Legitimate buyers will inquire for additional pictures.

Carter & Clinton both wore Timex digitals while in office (P.E. Yo-Bama wears either a TAG-Heuer or, more recently, a Secret Service branded chrono that some of the agents gave him). No idea what Carter currently wears (though I doubt it is either a Timex or cheap), but, almost immediately upon leaving The White House, Clinton suddenly amassed (& began to be frequently seen wearing) quite a collection of high end watches (Rolex, JlC, Cartier, Dubuis, Breitling, Panerai, etc). Reagan wore a Corum $20 gold coin watch. Cheney wears a Rolex Daydate. The elder Bush usually wears a Patek Phillipe & I recall reading that someone gave W a Franck Muller that he wears occasionally along with a Daydate. With the exception of LBJ, who was always over-the-top, recent Democrats have been trained to portray themselves as just regular, everyday 'middle class' folks. Even though all but 1 of the recent Democratic candidates for President are millionaires, many times over, they all wear cheap, digital watches in public (saving the good stuff for private gatherings among their peers, which are out of bounds to the everyday 'middle class' folks).

Ending the work week with my beater

I am not a fan of pocket watches worn on the wrist anyway, but just about every men's fashion magazine for the past year has been referring to big (over 42mm) watches as being 'so 2006' or 'out of style'. And whenever a Democrat moves into the White House (soon, no doubt, to be renamed 'The Peoples' House' by its new inhabitants), fashions trend to become much less aristocratic & more proletarian. Compare the watches worn by Bill Clinton & Jimmy Carter (at least while President) to those of Ronald Reagan or Dick Cheney.

Ditto Doc.

Case in point - I recently picked up a mint 'Roulette' (red/black) date disc for my 6542 project. The last 2 Roulettes (neither in quite the same condition) sold for $2,300 & $2,500, respectively. I paid less than $600 for mine (& it probably would have gone unsold had I not grabbed it). To be sure, that is still an insane amount for a small date disc. But, in the world of vintage Rolex, insanity is (always) the next 'black', regardless of the state of the economy.

Yes, things have changed. 20 years ago, people in the US used to be able to buy any Rolex part over-the-counter from any a local AD. Today, even the ADs cannot get parts unless they are within the official Rolex dealer network & have an on-site service center with a parts account. And those that can get parts are not permitted to sell them. ADs treat their clients much better in the UK & EC.

I posted a tutorial somewhere that you can search out. But, basically, you can either go the easy route & just remove the rotor (1 screw), or do it right by removing the auto-wind module from the main plate (2 screws)....disassemble the module (a few screws, I forget the exact number) & leave out the 2 double-toothed reversing gears). After reassembly (without the 2 reversing gears or rotor), you have a pseudo manual-wind movement. This means that you must manually wind the movement to charge the mainspring, but you cannot overwind it since the barrel (the metal container where the mainspring resides) still contains the clutch that allows the spring to slip on its arbor when the spring reaches full-wind. (The details are much too complicated to explain here, but there are a number of books on watchmaking if you wish to learn more about how movements work.)

Only 30%???? I am seeing alot of minty Newmans that were selling (FAST), in April, for $80,000-$100,000 now going unsold at $25k. It is definitely a buyers' market out there. But, judging from Rolex's resiliency following the previous economic landslide ('87), I am sure the buyers' market will begin reversing back into a sellers' paradise the day after the market trends rebound. Of course, who knows when that will happen? It could be next week or next year.