How many Rolex 5512/5513/5517s on IG are Gen?

[LifeTrekker]

I've been looking at pictures of the Rolex 55XX series of Submariners on IG, and I'm having a hard time believing that all these watches are genuine, especially the 5517s, since they were truely used as tool watches by military personnel, and would have likely been pretty beat up as a result.
 
So serious question here; what percentage of the 5517s specifically, and the 55XX series of watches in general posted on IG would you guess are genuine versus tribute (rep) watches?
 
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
 

[alligoat]

What's IG? Instagram....

How about a link?

[LifeTrekker]

What's IG? Instagram....
How about a link?

Yup. IG is Instagram. I use the IG app on my phone, but if you search for the hashtag #rolex5512 , #rolex5513 , and #rolex5517 , all the photos I'm talking about will come up. Anyway, here is a sample screenshot for the 5517.





Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[ziax]

I reckon it depends on the following of the person if they have a lot of followers it's quite risky posting reps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LifeTrekker]

I reckon it depends on the following of the person if they have a lot of followers it's quite risky posting reps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True, the IG users with lots of followers will be more closely scrutinized. But with some of the reps I see around here, especially the very well done Frankens with lots of gen parts, how would anyone be able to tell the difference between a gen and a rep in a photo on IG?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[LifeTrekker]

So let me ask the question a little differently. Have any of you seen a photo of a 5512/5513/5517 on IG and said to yourself, "You know, this looks like a gen, but I'm just not sure. There just seems to be something off about It. It doesn't feel quite right to me for some reason. It might be rep."

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[stüssi]

I actually have asked the same question a lot myself, nice to know that others are not sure either. Same with the 1680 reds on IG. 

I noticed this especially with glossy gilt 5512 as they just seem to be too perfect and alot of the dials seem to be repainted. However I am no expert and might be completely wrong lol. 

Edited February 2, 2018 by stüssi

[LifeTrekker]

 

 

 

 

I actually have asked the same question a lot myself, nice to know that others are not sure either. Same with the 1680 reds on IG.  I noticed this especially with glossy gilt 5512 as they just seem to be too perfect and alot of the dials seem to be repainted. However I am no expert and might be completely wrong lol. 

 

 

Yeah, "too perfect" has crossed my mind many times when looking at vintage Rolex watches on IG. But then again, I have looked at 55XX series watches offered for sale on Bob's Watches, (which I assume are all gens) and a lot of them mention in their descriptions that the "hands have been relumed to match the dial", etc. So even if all of them on IG are gen, (which I seriously doubt), one could assume that the reason so many of them look "too perfect" is because they have been touched up and restored in one way or another.

 

Or, they could be reps.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

[Yllekp]

I  doubt many people are into vintage watches except gen collectors or rep collectors. My guess would be they are probably real. Who knows, are interested or know how to get a Vintage Rolex reps unless they are on the fora?

 

A few years ago I could pick up a decent 5513 for 4.5k or less, so they were not expensive (emphasis on were not). Some could be passed down family heirlooms. Many gen owners send their watches to Rolex for servicing and Rolex will replace anything they see fit thus spoiling the originality of the watch. Also Gen owners update their watches with new bezels, hands, dials bracelets etc, all of which may not be period corect so who can tell if it is genstein, original (a little easier) or franken. 

 

Conversely how would you know from a pic this is not a 1986 5513 with a 1964 7206 bracelet unless I told you both watch and bracelet were modded and both are frankens? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LifeTrekker]

 

 

 

 

I  doubt many people are into vintage watches except gen collectors or rep collectors. My guess would be they are probably real. Who knows, are interested or know how to get a Vintage Rolex reps unless they are on the fora?  

A few years ago I could pick up a decent 5513 for 4.5k or less, so they were not expensive (emphasis on were not). Some could be passed down family heirlooms. Many gen owners send their watches to Rolex for servicing and Rolex will replace anything they see fit thus spoiling the originality of the watch. Also Gen owners update their watches with new bezels, hands, dials bracelets etc, all of which may not be period corect so who can tell if it is genstein, original (a little easier) or franken. 

 

Conversely how would you know from a pic this is not a 1986 5513 with a 1964 7206 bracelet unless I told you both watch and bracelet were modded and both are frankens? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your watches look great Yllekp! And if you wanted, I'll bet you could post them to IG and no one would be able to tell that they are not made of 100% gen Rolex parts. And that's kinda my question. Is there really no way to tell a well done rep from a gen when all you have to go on are a few IG pics? From what I can tell, and you have confirmed, there doesn't seem to be. Now if it's not well done, that's another question all together.

 

And I would also venture to say that most rep "craftsmen" like the folks found here in the fora know more about the gens than most gen collectors do. In order to pull off a convincing "tribute", almost by default they have to.

 

On a slightly related note, a friend of mine is a gen collector, and wears a 1680 daily that he picked up from the original owner over a decade ago for about $1000.00.

 

This same friend was helping his boss buy a used Submariner, and found what he thought was a suitable 16610 for him. He took it to his watchmaker and gen Rolex "expert", who after an hour of inspection inside and out declared his doubt as to its authenticity. His determination apparently had something to do with the absence of some "secret marks" that gens have and that only the Rolex Factory and Authorized Service Centers know about. Now, I have no idea if it was actually a gen or a rep, but it it was a rep, my guess is that is was a "Super Franken" with maybe a rep midcase and the rest gen parts, including the movement. Or it could have been a gen, and the "expert" was not as well informed on the subject as he though he was.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

[Yllekp]

4 minutes ago, LifeTrekker said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your watches look great Yllekp! And if you wanted, I'll bet you could post them to IG and no one would be able to tell that they are not made of 100% gen Rolex parts. And that's kinda my question. Is there really no way to tell a well done rep from a gen when all you have to go on are a few IG pics? From what I can tell, and you have confirmed, there doesn't seem to be. Now if it's not well done, that's another question all together.

 

And I would also venture to say that most rep "craftsmen" like the folks found here in the fora know more about the gens than most gen collectors do. In order to pull off a convincing "tribute", almost by default they have to.

 

On a slightly related note, a friend of mine is a gen collector, and wears a 1680 daily that he picked up from the original owner over a decade ago for about $1000.00.

 

This same friend was helping his boss buy a used Submariner, and found what he thought was a suitable 16610 for him. He took it to his watchmaker and gen Rolex "expert", who after an hour of inspection inside and out declared his doubt as to its authenticity. His determination apparently had something to do with the absence of some "secret marks" that gens have and that only the Rolex Factory and Authorized Service Centers know about. Now, I have no idea if it was actually a gen or a rep, but it it was a rep, my guess is that is was a "Super Franken" with maybe a rep midcase and the rest gen parts, including the movement. Or it could have been a gen, and the "expert" was not as well informed on the subject as he though he was.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

Only RSC should really know and of course a lot of builders on the fora lol. If there are any tells there are people here who could tell in a heartbeat. The problem is some gens are serviced locally with aftermarket parts and the owner is happy that he has saved a few magic beans. This will turn a gen into a franken. I would however guess there are a lot of Franken builds sold as gen. They probably are 80% gen but probably only people very familar with reps or gens could tell. The mid case for a 16610 is easy as StarTime do a very convincing one and there are plenty of modders and engravers here who could make it even more convincing. 

[jimcon11]

8 hours ago, LifeTrekker said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your watches look great Yllekp! And if you wanted, I'll bet you could post them to IG and no one would be able to tell that they are not made of 100% gen Rolex parts. And that's kinda my question. Is there really no way to tell a well done rep from a gen when all you have to go on are a few IG pics? From what I can tell, and you have confirmed, there doesn't seem to be. Now if it's not well done, that's another question all together.

 

And I would also venture to say that most rep "craftsmen" like the folks found here in the fora know more about the gens than most gen collectors do. In order to pull off a convincing "tribute", almost by default they have to.

 

On a slightly related note, a friend of mine is a gen collector, and wears a 1680 daily that he picked up from the original owner over a decade ago for about $1000.00.

 

This same friend was helping his boss buy a used Submariner, and found what he thought was a suitable 16610 for him. He took it to his watchmaker and gen Rolex "expert", who after an hour of inspection inside and out declared his doubt as to its authenticity. His determination apparently had something to do with the absence of some "secret marks" that gens have and that only the Rolex Factory and Authorized Service Centers know about. Now, I have no idea if it was actually a gen or a rep, but it it was a rep, my guess is that is was a "Super Franken" with maybe a rep midcase and the rest gen parts, including the movement. Or it could have been a gen, and the "expert" was not as well informed on the subject as he though he was.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

As Yllekp said, there are many details even the Vietnam builders often get wrong that the "experts" pick up on, usually pertaining to the dial. It seems to me that the gen collectors are a bit more knowledgeable about these things since they are the ones dropping six figures on a small piece of metal and they can't afford to be wrong even once.

 

With that said, I don't see the line between gen and rep being nearly as clear as most of the gen forum users pretend it to be. It's obvious that the gen collectors feel their exclusivity threatened by the high quality reps and posture as though the difference is night and day.

For instance, have a look at the Rolex passion report, where this man claims to identify about 50 details in any rep dial, neatly marked with red dots, proving the watch is *FAKE!!*  The problem is that there is some degree of variance in the gen watches and dials; no one at Rolex knew these watches would ever be collected or scrutinized to this degree. This writer, supposedly a notable expert, often contradicts himself as to what details are right or wrong, which, along with his atrocious English and extremely belabored writing style, certainly makes for an interesting psychological study.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 4, 2018 by jimcon11

[LifeTrekker]

As Yllekp said, there are many details even the Vietnam builders often get wrong that the "experts" pick up on, usually pertaining to the dial. It seems to me that the gen collectors are a bit more knowledgeable about these things since they are the ones dropping six figures on a small piece of metal and they can't afford to be wrong even once.
 
With that said, I don't see the line between gen and rep being nearly as clear as most of the gen forum users pretend it to be. It's obvious that the gen collectors feel their exclusivity threatened by the high quality reps and posture as though the difference is night and day.
For instance, have a look at the Rolex passion report, where this man claims to identify about 50 details in any rep dial, neatly marked with red dots, proving the watch is *FAKE!!*  The problem is that there is some degree of variance in the gen watches and dials; no one at Rolex knew these watches would ever be collected or scrutinized to this degree. This writer, supposedly a notable expert, often contradicts himself as to what details are right or wrong, which, along with his atrocious English and extremely belabored writing style, certainly makes for an interesting psychological study.
 
 
 
 

Thanks for the link jimcon11. That was an interesting article, although, as you pointed out, a bit difficult to read.

While reading the article, the thought came to mind that while undoubtedly some of the dials he proclaims as "FAKE" truely are, I'll also bet that some of his supposedly "Fake" dials are actually real. As you pointed out, when these watches were originally made, no one expected they would be scrutinized to the degree that they are today.

In addition, I think that people in general, and the Rolex collectors more specifically, have an overinflated idea of just how "perfect" a Rolex watch is, or was, when it was originally made. We're talking the '50's and '60's for when most of these watches were made, and the manufacturing processes and quality control were just not up the standards we hold today.

Besides, back in the day, a Rolex was just a watch. A very good watch, to be certain, even a premium watch, but they were not a luxury product like they are today. They were sold with the intention of being worn, and used as a tool, especially a model like the Submariner. They were not as "perfect" as the Rolex collectors like to think they were. Thus my conclusion that some of the article writer's proclaimed "FAKES", are actually probably real.

So, as he recommended, the collector of vintage Rolex watches would be best to arm themselves with a Giger Counter to help ensure they don't get scammed. That is, unless and until the "FAKE" dial makers get themselves a supply of radium to dope onto their "FAKE" dials. Then they're kinda screwed.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk