By-Tor Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 So waddya say? http://tinyurl.com/kkr9lo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Thanks for the heads up, By-Tor! It's very pretty, but without the bakelite (plastic) reverse printed bezel insert and funky bezel, why bother? Really it looks no different than my 1675 with the crown guards cut off. The bakelite insert is what MAKES this watch. Hmmmmm... I could cut off my crown guards... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Looks like a franken to me (regardless of the seller's reference to Skeet (which is known to contain a number of factual errors), I have never seen a 1675 SCOC dial in a '58 6542 ). And, anyway, I am with Nanuq on the bezel/insert . Thanks for the heads-up, but I think I prefer my own Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bertieng Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 freddy, if one day you will decide to sell your 6542 with the Jubliee bracelet, give me a call. I will be all over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I agree with Nanuq and Freddy- no bakelite bezel and the dial is a later replacement- tritium wasn't used in 1958. Sure, it may have been replaced by Rolex, but it's not original. Still a nice watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 No "flat three"? That does it, the deal is off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 freddy, if one day you will decide to sell your 6542 with the Jubliee bracelet, give me a call. I will be all over it. What, this old thing? Sorry, but I think Nanuq (& about 10 other people) is ahead of you in the waiting line. No "flat three"? That does it, the deal is off. Yes, that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 So waddya say? Nice GMT hand on that one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigCrown Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Service dial + aluminum insert = $6,000 watch ( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 i understand your questions i researched this watch for 10 months before i listed it, i have all the dials parts etc to make it like you say it should be, if you read skeets book it also says." the 6542 model was not immediately replaced by the 1675 model. and later versions had an all white printed dial. at the bottom of the dial the wording was changed from swiss to swiss t<25 indicating that the luminous material had changed from luminous to tritium." there was overlap in the dials. also date wheels . also james dowling speaks of the same overlaps with hands, dials, date wheels, and bezels, the owner claims the watch was not changed except for the band and since she did not try to get top dollar for it i beleive her. after much research i had to leave it alone. everything is matching and aged evenly and it is right in the period of all the transition.i have all the pages included with the watch showing these variations. thanks, ralph I looked at Skeet and Urul, at that point the insert didn't bother me so much, but the dial should have said 'Swiss' in my mind, predating the T<25 era by 5 years or so, date wheel is another issue. But this was Ralph's response. Somewhat ambiguous, but I thought I'd share it w/ the rest of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornerstone Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 @alligoat - Hope you don't mind, I added the quote marks in case folk thought you were the seller rather than quoting the seller! If that's an issue just take 'em out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Quite all right- I should have prefaced that those were RolexRalph's answers to my question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 I looked at Skeet and Urul, at that point the insert didn't bother me so much, but the dial should have said 'Swiss' in my mind, predating the T<25 era by 5 years or so, date wheel is another issue. But this was Ralph's response. Somewhat ambiguous, but I thought I'd share it w/ the rest of you. I read the seller's story, but until/unless I see another like it (with proper provenance) from a reliable source, I would clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 At a guess, I'd say it was a project built by someone like myself who just likes messing around with parts rather than trying to go for a particular model I would be prepared to accept that the parts themselves were of the claimed vintage, I just think they were probably put together somewhere other than the Rolex factory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.