JoJo35 Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Anyone notice any problems with this piece? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Nope, for a moment i thought that it should have the non adjustable movement fitted, but then i thought the movement is right, then i thought about the gmt hand but then the big triangle is right, 6 mil serial is right for the year isnt it? Willing to learn though, what is it JoJo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Looks fine to me also. Other than a few typos in the description, I see nothing wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJo35 Posted May 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 ...maybe I should change my opening thread to "Does anyone see and major problems with this piece!" x2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 16750 was produced was produced 81-88 so if his date is correct then it would have to be a 1675? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacher62 Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Don't see it...maybe the cyclops is not AR'd??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJo35 Posted May 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 16750 was produced was produced 81-88 so if his date is correct then it would have to be a 1675? His date is obviously incorrect, but that would be too easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 ok what am i missing, i know it will be something simple and large but what it it, i have been checking against the below info Ref. 16750 Production Period: 1981-1988 Model Name: Rolex GMT Master Caliber: 3075, 28800A/h, hacking, quickset Pressure proof to 100m/330ft Bracelet: Oyster 78360, Jubil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken fingerlove Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Are the crown guards or crown off? they look weird Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 I don't see a whole lot wrong... Correct range serial for a 16750, dial is genuine, hands are good and in the correct stack for a 16750, crown, CGs are fine, caseback is correctly signed 'PATENTED' for this era watch, 3075 of course checks out. If anything is really out of line, it's the MKII dial in a case/serial as low as 6.3M. But that could have been swapped in at some point or another during service, restoration, etc. While not technically correct for the specific production range watch, it's still a genuine dial and still plausible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRae Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Shouldn't the bezel be 24 clicks only? It's in between now?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Seems to be a franken-gen in the wrong case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 No clicks on a 16750... It's a bi-directional bezel... Case looks correct; engravings are consistent with a 16750... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 So a 16750 can have a 6.303,XXX serial? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Yeah... 6.3M is okay. The only thing that looks off is... REGISTERED DESIGN instead of ORIG ROLEX DESIGN. But the actual fonts used for 16750 are consistent, notably the '5'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Hummmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 For sub-7M cases, REGISTERED DESIGN is okay, BTW... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJo35 Posted May 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 ...geezus, you guys gotta do your homework Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Please do enlighten us then, B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 ...geezus, you guys gotta do your homework I'd rather just cheat off of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJo35 Posted May 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 I'd rather just cheat off of you. lol I'll make you guys squirm a little longer. I can't believe nobody picked this up yet. I feel sorry (kinda) for the guy that ends up buying this piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Do you make your wife wait in suspense like this JoJo, Why don't we have a teasing smiley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Any longer, and I'll probably just lose interest... It is just a 16750 afterall... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwatch Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Ok, I just don't think I can sit staring at pics of 16750's any longer. I just can't see it! What is the glaring issue we are all missing?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted May 24, 2010 Report Share Posted May 24, 2010 Boy I dunno... maybe his date font is off a smidge? I've had people question mine too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now