RWG Technical Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 You remember how hard it was to try to make the T16 fit my case? There was no WAY it would go on. It sounds like persuasion made it go on yours okay. Now that you mention it, I do remember the problems I had, not at all unlike the problems I had with this one, so I guess that fact alone doesn't discount the case origin... Question, was the crystal retaining ring triangular in cross section, or "L" shaped? I'm betting triangular. The retaining ring is not "L" shaped, more like a triangle I guess. Picture a rectangle with a grove cut in the middle of the outside edge, and at the top edge, cut off at a 45 deg angle, that's what this one looks like from the side. Hey do you still have those photos of my open 6536? Try comparing the case lugs with your 6541. Just a hunch... Probably on my home computer, but your much better at these comparisons than I am... RG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Gaaaaaaah! I never spotted it until now. Ziggy, look at the big gap between the chapter ring on your dial and the rehaut bevel inside the case. Huuuuuuuuuge gap. It's bogus. This is how close the minutes track should be to the steel of the case: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJo35 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Not necessarily, go back and check a couple of the other gen pics that were posted Gaaaaaaah! I never spotted it until now. The Zigmeister, look at the big gap between the chapter ring on your dial and the rehaut bevel inside the case. Huuuuuuuuuge gap. It's bogus. This is how close the minutes track should be to the steel of the case: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Wow The Zigmeister, that is a beautiful job. I just logged on to find this and had to sit staring at each picture... The case does have a "new" feel too it, but, Freddy's comparison isn't valid.. although similarly numbered, the 6541 and the 6543 are different animals.. They are a slightly different setup as the 6543 (of which there are less than 100) does not use shielding to achieve it's anti-magnetic properties. Note the channel Freddy is looking for is simply obscured by the sheilding for the "M" movement, and the 43 is "NOT" an "M" I find myself simultaneously stunned and stumped. Lack of use would explain the "new" look, the lack of wm marks in the case back, and the seized movement. Considering that a watch of this age could have been "lost in a trunk" for the last half of it's life, assuages most of my suspicion, but the thing that does bother me is the dial. Still, I suppose it could be a very nice forgery of the case... empty case pics, and a nice shot from the side with a reference for thickness would finish off any doubt there. The dial... not much hope. Although, if one could presume that the problem with the many extant Gen's "crippled R's" is due to the vagaries of screening on an uneven surface or a clogged screen, then there should be examples with "full R's" where the screen lay perfect or from before the screen clogged. But, the diameter of the full print seems small, while the lettering a bit thick. Any before or disassembly shots (especially back of the dial)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Ziggy - I remain convinced that this is a franken (only gen part is the movement). But knowing the case diameter (minus crown) might help. I believe the gen is 37mm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 This is the closest i could find with a chapter ring that far in at BJs online Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 This is the closest i could find with a chapter ring that far in at BJs online Nice find there FxrAndy... Looks like some nicely matched "R's" there... But, the diameter seems a bit larger than The Zigmeister's example.. (seconds/chapter ring) Which is the main reason The Zigmeister's example dial "feels" bad to me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Thats what i was refering to, did not even look at the Rs, but what i belive with what i have read about vintage rolex and watches in general is that any thing is possible, ok call me an optimist, I doupt also that it is all original other wise it would be worth what $40k $50K?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 One large point that just jumped to my eye was the length of the min hand or to be more presice the relation to the min hand and chapter ring, that has always been a big no no to have a hand extending over its reference point! Also as mentioned the corronett mouth is totaly different and the "swiss" font is sooo much larger than i think is should be, that may be the curve of the crystal though. I would like to see this with the bezel fitted though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 That's the dial. Amazing quality, funny how they make it with a few "flaws"... RG With out that too small ring we would have really been scratching our heads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I think i have found the source of the dial, Hmmmm price on request, interesting have a look description states refinished? and in vietnam! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Dial is $480 from NDtrading right here And here is the $1,100 NDtrading case (click the image for the link) The caseback either came from another rep watch or someone else has a similar case with 6541 markings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Exact same photo available from both sites too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Freddy, I am not saying that the case is or isn't fake, I am simply saying your comparison isn't valid, without stapling a big ol' "I DISAGREE" on your post and not stating clearly the reasons why... Comparing the 6541 to the 6543 is much like comparing the 6536 to the 6538A. Different animals. Also a hint at something that I have stuck in the back of my head, given the "thriftiness" extant in many Rolex pieces. The 6543 doesn't use the Faraday cage, and therefore has a different case/caseback configuration. Is THIS what you disagree with? If so, then you are wrong my friend... I said I'd like to see more pics (internal and side with reference), so I could better determine if, in fact, the case was fake. So, obviously I still have some doubts. However, I am not so ready to call "fake" on the case. Since I have doubts about the case, how could there be disagreement here? I, like you, don't like the dial, though I don't disqualify it simply for the "R's" and gave my reasoning for such... perhaps this is where you disagree? Andy just showed us a nice example with good "R's", so that kind of falls flat. I agree that the dial is bad, 99%. I also agree there is a question with the case. I cannot however state that the case is bad, simply because, as Repaustria put it "there are milgauss cases out there" and the dial is bad. Where would one come up with a 1030 M with all it's proper shielding without the case? That shielding of the movement (mid case, not caseback) isn't evident in the "aftermarket" examples that I have seen, it IS evident in The Zigmeister's. Edit to add: I notice you proved my point with your post you made while I was typing... ND Case doesn't have the midcase shielding, AND the caseback shielding is stamped, NOT SPUN as the GEN example of The Zigmeister's, and not even the same looking material... The groove for the caseback in the case itself also doesn't match the groove in The Zigmeister's example, hence, THIS IS NOT THE SOURCE FOR The Zigmeister'S CASE OR SHIELDING. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 POTR -- I think Repaustria was saying the same thing I am saying about the case -- there are alot of aftermarket Milgauss cases available, making the likelihood that this is 1 of those all that much better. Because of the rarity of these watches (very rare), I take the stance that it is a fake until proven otherwise. And based on Ziggy's pictures & description, the only thing I am convinced of, at this point, is that the movement is a gen Rolex movement (which was available in many Oyster Perpetuals of the period). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Also the case from NDtrading has a plain bezel the ziggy example should be fitted with a rotating bezel, i think! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJo35 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 the movement is a gen Rolex movement (which was available in many Oyster Perpetuals of the period). This statement is incorrect. The "M" was a totally different animal, and ONLY available in the 'gauss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 NT Case doesn't have the midcase shielding, AND the caseback shielding is stamped, NOT SPUN as the GEN example of Ziggy's... The groove for the caseback in the case itself also doesn't match the groove in Ziggy's example, hence, THIS IS NOT THE SOURCE FOR ZIGGY'S CASE OR SHIELDING. Only the owner (or modder) of the watch knows the origin of the case. I can only guess based on the known sources of aftermarket cases (NDtrading being the most popular). What I do know for certain is that aftermarket cases for these watches are plentiful on the web & the gen watches are not. So, based on the discrepancies, I tend to assume the worst until proven otherwise. I think we will all know more if Ziggy can measure the case & post pictures of the model & serial numbers between the lugs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 The watch indeed is a Franken, I am very sure of that. There are several fake Milgauss cases available. Here's the MBW 6541 next to my 6536. Check out the lugs and chapter ring/rehaut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 This statement is incorrect. The "M" was a totally different animal, and ONLY available in the 'gauss That could indicate a gen Milgauss movement, but Phong (and other aftermarket sellers) is more than happy (for a price) to engrave your pillar plate (or any other part of a movement) with the text of your choice. So the 'M', while helpful, proves nothing by itself. If the dial passed mustard, then little details like that would hold more water. But this watch has so many questionable issues that I remain far from convinced it is anything more than a nice franken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 HCMC- is that Ho Chi Minh City? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FxrAndy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Some thing i just found and and waht was mentioned above. From a rolly forum Hi, I owned a 6541 Milgauss since 1966, it is the model with the lightning bolt second hand. Only a few hundred have been produced between 1958 and 1962, it was a shopdaughter at that time. At the same time the Submariner was introduced and that was an instant hit, mainly because of 007 in the first Bond movies. My 6541 reg# 412505 was produced in 1958 4th quarter. The movement is a 1030M (m for modification) it is higly antimagnetic, hence milgauss (Gauss was an Austrian scientist who worked on magnetism ) The movement is encased in a soft iron inner case and the parts of the movement that are usually iron based in normal watches, are non ferro. The dial is also made out of soft iron. The watch costed 200 dollar in 1965. It is the rarest post war tool watch that Rolex produced. The later version 1019 is made in far larger quantities , but are still very expensive when they come up for auctions. The 6541 will collect around + or - 75000 usd now (if you can find one !). I can send some pictures if you like regards So to verify the movement would be to test it for magnetic prperty, if it is no magnetic then it is an M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 So to verify the movement would be to test it for magnetic prperty, if it is no magnetic then it is an M Good point. I also just realized that 1 of the ways the 6543 (which lacked the lightning bolt second hand) differed from the 6541 was that it is amagnetic, meaning that the critical components of the movement were comprised of anti-magnetic metals. Because of this, the 6543 did not require the magnetic shielding as used in the 6541. These amagnetic movements were then identified with the addition of an 'M', denoting their amagnetic properties. Checking the movement's magnetic properties could prove this 1 way or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I just found this on TZ And another comparing the 6541 & 6543 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I for one would say - a gen 1030 that is so screwed that it doesn't even wind?! - equipped with one of those fascinatingly worn down movements, that crap out sooner than later. Let me clarify my original statement. The movement wasn't running (because it wasn't wound) and wouldn't "wind" meaning the click wheels were all gummed up and stuck together, not unusual or uncommon for an old automatic movement. Not wanting to force or break anything, I did NOT try to wind it, or see if it would run, with the crown or the Rotor. Better to play it safe and tear it down, clean it, and then see what I was up against. As it was, all it needed was a cleaning. After it was cleaned, I also said, "1/10th of a turn of the mainspring and it started to run..." It works perfect on the timer, and is withing a few seconds after 4 days of running. I don't believe for one minute that the movement is "worn down" or that it will crap out anytime soon. Why should it? It was dirty and gummed up, but not worn out or crap. The pics clearly show a nice clean movement with little brassing or wear. I won't be posting any pics of any serial numbers (thats' why the pictures are taken the way they are). All I know is what I shared in the first pics, the owner bought something and sent it to me for servicing and overhaul, beyond that, I don't know nothing... I just though it would be an interesting topic of discussion and information for everyone, especially for me, who is not well versed in these models. RG 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.