Another Franken on VRF?

[davids100]

Hi folks,

 

Have a look at this one:

 

http://www.network54.com/Forum/207673/message/1399688922/FS-+1969+Rolex+Day-Date+1803+President+w-+Non-Luminous+Dial

 

Although good rep seller, this one is a Franken.

Who spots the error?

 

 

[davids100]

Same seller, same method:

 

http://www.network54.com/Forum/207673/message/1399688855/FS-+1972+Rolex+Explorer+Matte+Dial+1016

[candide2424]

What about the other subs he has offfered for sale; are they franken also?

[davids100]

the 1680 from 1978 looks gen, didn't see another 1680 from him recently

[cjjoyce1]

If the error you're talking about is the case and the cut-out in the inner ring behind the balance wheel for the microstellar adjustment tool - it's hard to see in both cases, but it is there.  These both look fine to me.

[danielv2000]

Movement says 1570?

When a seller mentions "correct this" and "correct that" - to me that's a flag that says the watch was assembled from genuine parts. Nothing wrong against that but it's a nice way of saying it. As opposed to a watch that says "all original".

[davids100]

President case is a fake probably gold but not Rolex

Explorer movement is not appropriate to this watch. Either the dial has been changed or the movement but both of them are from different eras

[automatico]

Day/Date movements of this era have DD at the beginning of the movement serial number...problem is the serial number does not show.

[lhooq]

Explorer movement is not appropriate to this watch. Either the dial has been changed or the movement but both of them are from different eras

 

I disagree.  The dial is correct for the early 1970s, as is the movement.

 

Is there something I'm not seeing?

[gavidoc]

I see nothing wrong with this watch and kirill is a well known seller.

[AKTime]

I have bought Gen parts from Kiril before and had no issue. He has a pretty good reputation on VRF.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[Tonyyammine]

This is a well know seller if your sure about this make sure u contact someone.

[davids100]

Ok I admit I was fast on my judgement regarding the 1016, I was comparing gen 1971' ones with his and his one is a 1972' so next subtile generation. Altough I maintain the point on the DD, sure the case is a fake. It´s possible that the seller didn't even noticed it himself but he should had to.

Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk

[alligoat]

What makes you think the DD case is a fake?

The only thing I see is that the case is over polished, engravings look fine to me.

I'm not sure about the movement plate saying 1570, it should say 1556, but there's probably no difference between those two plates anyway.

[ogladio]

What makes you think the DD case is a fake?

The only thing I see is that the case is over polished, engravings look fine to me.

I'm not sure about the movement plate saying 1570, it should say 1556, but there's probably no difference between those two plates anyway.

Iirc, this watch does indeed have a 1575 movement (1570 with date) - but the stamping is still 1570 on the movement for some odd reason. Edited May 12, 2014 by ogladio

[alligoat]

The Day-Date is a 1555 or a 1556 movement (of this era) so it would be the 1575 with the added Day feature- somewhat similar to the 1575 GMT movement. It's a day-date movement but it shares many of the same parts with the 1575 date movement.

[automatico]

alligoat is right in the 1555/56 being mostly a 1575. I have a 1556 and it is almost the same movement as a 1575 except for the date parts and DD at the beginning of the serial number.

DD = Day/Date

D = Date

numbers only = no date

no numbers = not a certified chronometer

I would bet most Day/Date watches had 1555 or 1556 stamped on the rotor plate because this was their top of the line watch and they wanted everything to be right. 

 

1055 D/D = 18000 bph with 1030 type escapement

1555 D/D = 18000 bph with 1560 type escapement

1556 D/D = 19800 bph with 1570 type escapement

1055 D/D introduced 1954

1555 D/D introduced 1959

1556 D/D introduced 1965

 

Not many 1055 runners left because of No Parts 4 U.

[davids100]

Look at the engraving. All 3 sitcks from the "E"s are the same lenghts. It´s never the case on rolex engravings.

Also the minerva stamp is poor quality

Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk

[alligoat]

"All 3 sitcks from the "E"s are the same lenghts. It´s never the case on rolex engravings."

 

I think you're taking a minor Rolex idiosyncrasy and trying to make it apply to all engravings- that's not the case. especially with vintage Rolex. Also, the engravings are done by hand on this case.

 

I'm not sure what a Minerva stamp is- Minerva was the Roman goddess of wisdom.

If you're referring to the 18kt stamp, I will admit that it's hard to see from the photo.

The caseback stampings all look good to me.

[1680]

In generel you could say: long E middle strokes -> no no.

 

With the Day Date I don't see issues, it is very common with gold watches that their engravings wear out, especially with the Day Dates since a lot of

them were/are worn with a leather strap with rubs between the lugs. On these watches some watchmakers try to reengrave by hand which looks a

bit sloppy, but I've seen that very often.

The Explorer is absolutely fine, dial and movement are period correct, engraving is correct for 3.5mil. Only thing; I don't think that 7836 came with

the watch.