Pugwash Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 If the experts here are unsure, I'd say it's done its job. Nice work, Zig. I hope to own a watch so old and battered it needs to be sent to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 I won't be posting any pics of any serial numbers (thats' why the pictures are taken the way they are). Ziggy -- I agree with you on the serial number, but any chance you could post a pic of the model number between the lugs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted March 4, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Ziggy -- I agree with you on the serial number, but any chance you could post a pic of the model number between the lugs? Just got in from the gym...best I can offer is between the lugs says: "6541" "Brevet +" Time for a shower (me, not the miliwhatever it is) RG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Back from work... Maybe I should restate... When I say, "where does one find an "M" with it's proper shielding without the case?"... it might be better if I point out that the "spacer" that The Zigmeister referenced is the "mid case shielding" which I have not seen extant in a rep... and is not a part of other similar Gen Rolex cases that rep makers would be basing their product off of... the "spacer" is PART of the Faraday Cage that completely surrounds the "M" movement. It closes the "gaps" between the dial and the inner caseback cover, so that magnetism cannot easily enter. WITHOUT that "spacer" it is definitely a fake... I suppose that the easiest question to ask to make sure it is a real case, is "was it was engineered to perfectly fit the Faraday cage that holds the movement?"... and if that Faraday cage is, in fact, correct... What is visible of the cage looks SPOT ON. Ever seen a REP cover that looked like that one? Not yet... What would nearly cinch it for me (short of holding it in my hands and really being able to see it) is for The Zigmeister to tell me that everything fits perfectly (he already did), that indeed the "spacer" closes the cage by actually resting against the back of the dial (not something that was mentioned), and maybe that the serial is something really close to 412XXX. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted March 4, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Back from work... Maybe I should restate... When I say, "where does one find an "M" with it's proper shielding without the case?"... it might be better if I point out that the "spacer" that Ziggy referenced is the "mid case shielding" which I have not seen extant in a rep... and is not a part of other similar Gen Rolex cases that rep makers would be basing their product off of... the "spacer" is PART of the Faraday Cage that completely surrounds the "M" movement. It closes the "gaps" between the dial and the inner caseback cover, so that magnetism cannot easily enter. WITHOUT that "spacer" it is definitely a fake... I suppose that the easiest question to ask to make sure it is a real case, is "was it was engineered to perfectly fit the Faraday cage that holds the movement?"... and if that Faraday cage is, in fact, correct... What is visible of the cage looks SPOT ON. Ever seen a REP cover that looked like that one? Not yet... What would nearly cinch it for me (short of holding it in my hands and really being able to see it) is for Ziggy to tell me that everything fits perfectly (he already did), that indeed the "spacer" closes the cage by actually resting against the back of the dial (not something that was mentioned), and maybe that the serial is something really close to 412XXX. Well if anything is SPOT ON, it's you... You must have been sitting behind me at the bench when I assembled this one. The spacer ring as I call it, is machined and much to my disapointment, has to be installed on the movement BEFORE the dial goes on. In other words, the spacer/Faraday cage slips over the movement from the front (perfectly I will add, and the notches for the clamps are there as well). Once it's in place, there is a section of the spacer ring that is about 2mm wide that the dial then mounts onto, so the spacer is connected to and rests against the back of the dial. The back cover has a slight notch machined into it, and it presses down over this spacer ring, and it fits perfectly as well. The whole movement with the cage attached, then slips perfectly into the case, everything lines up perfect, including the small hole for the stem. The cage assembly appears to be quite old. And if that wasn't enough...your serial number...well are you sure you weren't in my watch room with me The O'ring in the crown and tube were very old and worn, I replaced them both. Here's what I am going to do, tonight I will take some pics of the spacer ring with the dial removed etc...maybe that will help shed some light. I have to say there are some very insightful and knowledgeable folks on this forum, thanks for the great feedback and comments, it helps me improve my knowledge. I'll have to pass this information on to the owner of the watch. RG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 I agree with Repaustria (still). Regardless of the fit of the Faraday cage or case, that ain't no gen Milgauss. No way, no how. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Thanks The Zigmeister, the tiny stem hole is part of the cage design as well, has to fit the stem closely as possible, without interference in order not to allow in the bad stuff, while not binding the stem... very tough part to get right, and not exactly a "drop in"... Maybe Freddy can refresh us on how easy things line up with "high end" aftermarket cases and gen movements, and then consider for himself how much more difficult it would be to add another complicated piece to the puzzle for the movement to still fit perfectly, and securely, with no deviation in it's relative internal "elevation" so that the movement won't rattle and the stem won't bind. The "frugal" nature of Rolex showed through with Explorers a few years ago, and for mid-century Rolex, well... jumbled parts and multiple 'surprising' in-house substitutions and modifications abound... sometimes due to more than one version of the watch being produced at the same time... I hinted at something in the back of my head... and that something would be in reference to this particular aspect of Rolex manufacture, if they had it on hand, they used it.. Consider this... the dial of this Rolex does not exactly look like the dial with which we are all most familiar, it DOES however bear more resemblance to the dial of the exceptionally more rare 6543. Further from rep... I am starting to think 1 of 1, in-house substitution. Is this the most rare milgauss of all? I owned a 6541 for a very long time, but I have only seen 1 real live 6543 close up... this far away in time from that experience of seeing it and comparing it to my own, the thing I recall is the the 43 "feeling" smaller, and the seconds hand being "too long"... Freddy, take a good long look at the pic in the TZ link you provided with the 41 and the 43, and maybe you will notice that the "43" dial definitely looks like the inspiration for the fake dials on the market. Why can this NOT be a Gen 43 dial... there were, after all, only 88 complete examples produced, and I for one can say that my single, real live experience with a 43 coupled with the pics that we all have for reference now (nearly none), doesn't allow me to discount this possibility. Also, there are "43's" that DO have the lightning bolt seconds hand (and it doesn't exceed the seconds ring like the dauphine minute hand and the straight seconds hand)... so, that is also in recognition of Rolex's noted vagaries of production, and in favor of this dial being yet another example of the same... The inspissated oil, old gaskets, perfect fit and alignment, actually looking like it's supposed to look on the inside (aftermarket cases are a joke with this model), and even the lack of "aging" say much to me in persuading me that this is Gen... The Zigmeister, I would tell the owner that, if he is certain of the watch's provenance (handed down through family or his own purchase from reputable party..), this could very well be one of the most valuable vintage Rolex's that anyone could reasonably hope to own (high 5/low 6 figures). I'd also tell him that if it is a forgery (and he knows it) then there is at least one collector out there that really wants to know the source(s), because nothing else out there approaches this in correctness. @Repaustria, the inside of watch cases don't really get that messed up without external contamination... and as far as staining from crud from the movement, the "real" case inside the case for this watch would have contained any crud from the movement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Maybe Freddy can refresh us on how easy things line up with "high end" aftermarket cases and gen movements, and then consider for himself how much more difficult it would be to add another complicated piece to the puzzle for the movement to still fit perfectly, and securely, with no deviation in it's relative internal "elevation" so that the movement won't rattle and the stem won't bind. Yes, almost anything is possible with vintage Rolex, but the possibilities end at aftermarket dials from NDtrading. Having an NDtrading dial in this watch eliminates any possibility of the watch being genuine. And it just stretches the bounds of credulousness to imagine someone owning a gen Milgauss movement & a genuine Milgauss case, but not having the gen Milgauss dial. I mean how could you possibly misplace your gen Milgauss dial? As for fitting gen movements into aftermarket cases, as long as you shave out a small circular section on the inside of the case to fit the movement's locking screw, the 1570 from my 1601 will fit into my MBW DRSD case quite nicely. More? How many of us have made poorly machined DW cases accept a V72 so well that it seems like the case was custom made for the movement, and we do it with simple hand tools (dremel, files, sandpaper). Where there is a modder with the will, there is always a way. And if you need any more reassurance that aftermarket cases can be made to fit gen movements, a quick visit to Phong's website (jewelryandwatch.com) should allay any remaining ambivalence you still have. This guy made a business out of turning generic gen movements into signed Rolex movements & fitting gen movements into aftermarket cases. He says he is even (and I am quoting directly from Phong's website) 'able to making new watch case by your specification 18kt yellow or white solid gold, or re-case for high grade vintage watches movement'. And all of Phong's watches have the same issues that Ziggy's watch has. What does that tell you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Something tells me you didn't read that whole post... Freddy, take a good long look at the pic in the TZ link you provided with the 41 and the 43, and maybe you will notice that the "43" dial definitely looks like the inspiration for the fake dials on the market. Why can this NOT be a Gen 43 dial... there were, after all, only 88 complete examples produced, and I for one can say that my single, real live experience with a 43 coupled with the pics that we all have for reference now (nearly none), doesn't allow me to discount this possibility. And what problems would this case have? This type of fitting requires precision machining of 5 different parts. You can't make that crap from ND look like this with a dremel.. you can't make that crap look like this if you had a proper lathe and drill press... it just doesn't have the same profiles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Something tells me you didn't read that whole post... I did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 I 100% agree with freddy that a fake dial in such a watch eliminates the fact of it being genuine. There are redialers in the US and in Europe taht do "real redials" - they are not that obvious and are actually gen based plates. Those redials are expensive. And these are the only ones getting done for real watch owners and even little of them. Now, a real redial is easily identified - in this Milgauss the real redialer would not have changed the crown logo for such an ugly one. Repaustria brings up another good point, which, for me, finalizes things. There are a number of genuine dial restorers like Universal Watch Repair in Michigan, which really do 'repaint' old watch dials They did my vintage Longines dial, which, to the naked eye, looks exactly like the original (sorry, but I forgot to take a before pic, but here it is minus 70+ years of stains & natural discoloration) Professional dial restorers produce work that contains no variations in font styles or sizes, no components that look weird or questionable, no dislocated numbers & no built-in inaccuracies that plague aftermarket dials like the 1 in Ziggy's watch. It just does not make sense that an owner of a rare & ultra expensive watch like a Milgauss would have fitted an obviously aftermarket dial to an otherwise genuine Rolex watch before consulting a professional dial restorer (and virtually every professional watchmaker & jeweler is well acquainted with dial restorers). On the other hand, it makes perfect sense for a modder to fit an aftermarket dial to an aftermarket case containing a gen movement taken from a relatively common Oyster Perpetual. Think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 If it is a fake dial... I offer: Situation D - Owner of watch first takes watch to less scrupulous watchmaker, who steals the valuable gen dial, fits a fake and tells the poor guy he can't do the repair for whatever reason... Anything is possible... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddy333 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 If it is a fake dial... I offer: Situation D - Owner of watch first takes watch to less scrupulous watchmaker, who steals the valuable gen dial, fits a fake and tells the poor guy he can't do the repair for whatever reason... Anything is possible... There are varying degrees of probability & I think this option ranks close to the bottom. But, yes, anything is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 If you will look closely at the caseback, you will notice that the engraving of bottom of the final 'S' in stainless is "opened up" a bit as if worn, and the surrounding area is slightly "burnished" matching the "button" on the inner case. This is what I would expect to see, as there is no movement after assembly, only during caseback installation, do we get any chance of any "wear." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southcoast68 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 I must say that this is one of the most interesting stories to be seen here in a while. If I may join with my 2 cents, I am agreeing with this being a franken (for now). I have a few resons for saying this. 1. The dial - we all know of the variances in vintage rollies, both Nanuq and myself have GMT Maters that have dials that supposedly "never existed" but have recently been verified as genuine, so there is no suprise in the variation in Milgauss dials as well. Still, this dial looks way too close to the NDTrading dial (notice how far away the hour dots are to the minute markers in The Zigmeister's pictures vs. Timezone pictures vs. NDTrading). Even then, I spotted one picture on Antiquorum of a 6541 with dot hour markers closer to the minute markers. But, in NO case that I could find do the minute or second hands extend beyond the outer minute track as shown on the one in The Zigmeister's pictures. Also, as was stated by others, the coronet at 12 does not look right. So, I am saying the dial has been replaced with aftermarket. 2. Why replace the dial - if this watch is all original and had been sitting for 30 years or more, the original dial would still be in there. It is possible that a dial replacement could have happened at some point years ago, but I don't think that even a replacement from Rolex would look quite like this one. 3. Where is the bezel - a dial would survive quite nicely provided the case was properly sealed, but the bezel is the one thing on a watch that would catch all kinds of hell over the years and would most likely show fading, scratches, possibly dents. Unless of couse this was a safe queen in which the bezel would be pristine and on the watch or The Zigmeister had not got far enough in the assembly of the watch before taking the picture. Now I say its a franken "for now" until we see other evidence since weird things do happen and this may just be one of those cases. In the end, short of having Rolex itself authenticate this one (and if I bought this one on the assumption that it is real, thats where I would send it) all we say here is speculation. The Milgauss is one of the vintage models that MUST have some sort of authentication either in the form of original paperwork or verification from Rolex since these models are just getting too high in value, and as was said earlier that amount of money will make folks do shady things. With all this said, I hope it can be found that this piece is found to be authentic, especially if it was purchased as so. If not, it says volumes of the ability and skill of todays modders. Either way, looking at these pictures, you all got me craving a rep of this one now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 I must say that this is one of the most interesting stories to be seen here in a while. If I may join with my 2 cents, I am agreeing with this being a franken (for now). I have a few resons for saying this. 1. The dial - we all know of the variances in vintage rollies, both Nanuq and myself have GMT Maters that have dials that supposedly "never existed" but have recently been verified as genuine, so there is no suprise in the variation in Milgauss dials as well. Still, this dial looks way too close to the NDTrading dial (notice how far away the hour dots are to the minute markers in The Zigmeister's pictures vs. Timezone pictures vs. NDTrading). Even then, I spotted one picture on Antiquorum of a 6541 with dot hour markers closer to the minute markers. But, in NO case that I could find do the minute or second hands extend beyond the outer minute track as shown on the one in The Zigmeister's pictures. Also, as was stated by others, the coronet at 12 does not look right. So, I am saying the dial has been replaced with aftermarket. The 6543 that Freddy posted in this thread, with the dagger hands and straight seconds... Seconds is longer than the outer track... The 6541 that Nanuq posted in this thread, with the dauphine hands and lightning seconds... Dauphine minute hand is longer than the outer track... Nice looking Milguass in that Rolex 50% off ad, as seen on this site... Dagger hands and Lightning seconds... track is wider, printing sharper BUT.. just looks odd. The 6541 that The Zigmeister STARTED THIS THREAD WITH... Dauphine hands with lightning seconds... Dauphine minute hand is longer than the outer track... just like Nuq's pic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southcoast68 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 (edited) The 6543 that Freddy posted in this thread, with the dagger hands and straight seconds... Seconds is longer than the outer track... The 6541 that Nanuq posted in this thread, with the dauphine hands and lightning seconds... Dauphine minute hand is longer than the outer track... Nice looking Milguass in that Rolex 50% off ad, as seen on this site... Dagger hands and Lightning seconds... track is wider, printing sharper BUT.. just looks odd. The 6541 that The Zigmeister STARTED THIS THREAD WITH... Dauphine hands with lightning seconds... Dauphine minute hand is longer than the outer track... just like Nuq's pic Maybe so, some of the pics are a bit dark, but to me they still don't have minute or second hands that come over the chapter ring to the extent that the one The Zigmeister pictured. We shall see as the story unfolds I guess. By the way, even if it is a franken, I would not mind having it in my collection Edit; By the way - I seem to remember that Watchmaster offered a great looking rep of this some time ago, does anyone have pictures of that one for comparison? Edited March 4, 2008 by southcoast68 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llsteve80 Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 If it is a fake dial... I offer: Situation D - Owner of watch first takes watch to less scrupulous watchmaker, who steals the valuable gen dial, fits a fake and tells the poor guy he can't do the repair for whatever reason... Anything is possible... I am agreeing with this statement. Phong will restore your watch with his parts, taking your parts in as "trade". So will another of the Vietnamese guys, but I forget which. I do not know enough of vintage watches to make any valid point as to the authenticity of the watch in question, but I think I am making a good point with this reference. Anything is possible. Either way, this is a very interesting thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victoria Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 **Magnificent** Longines must've been the Go-To-Watch when our grandparents were young, because you always hear of them when talking of inherited vintage watches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Yes, the Longines is nice.. but the L is dropped and cocked and the S is cocked... on top of the problem of the name running "uphill." No weird or questionable or inaccurate "funny" fonts from that dial refurbisher... nope. But from the angle that picture is taken, it's all really hard to see... Darn it, I was going to leave that one alone since it wasn't exactly germane to the discussion, but tempt me twice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted March 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Well here is a quick update... It's almost 10 pm, I have to get some sleep. I have taken more pictures as requested, I am uploading them to photobucket so I can place them on the forum tomorrow. I would like to add the following thoughts: 1. Remember this watch of mine? The original bracelet kept popping open, so what did the owner do? He replaced the Rolex Bracelet with a Spidel spring bracelet, you remember those from the local Drugstore (Apotek)...and threw the original bracelet in the garbage... 2. How about this watch of mine? Remember it? The person I bought it from, lived in bum fack nowhere, so far in the woods he had to come out to hunt...but he owned this watch since 1962...the original Rolex bracelet was missing as well...so I asked him: "What happened to the original bracelet?" "It broke while I was diving.." "Did you try and replace it with another genuine Rolex one?" "Yes, but it was $600 in 1982 and that was too expensive for me..." "So you replaced it with this one, what did you do with the original bracelet...did you happen to keep it???" "NO, it was broken, so I threw it OUT...why would I keep a broken bracelet...???" :blink: :blink: My point? The fact that the dial is not genuine, means nothing to me. These examples show that people do really stupid things, or the place they take the watch for servicing rips them off...who knows, I certainly don't... See you tomorrow...and for the record, I couldn't care less about if this watch is a franken, partially genuine, or whatever. I don't mean that in a bad or derogatory way towards the owner, it's not my watch, I have done what I was asked to do, service it and get it running again...I did my part. In any case, whatever the pics show tomorrow, it added a bit of excitement for this week's posting and it's informative for everyone, especially me. Thanks again for the input. See you tomorrow. RG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 I have learned more in this one loop than in everything else I have read in the last month. Ziggy- Thanks for getting this going. Participants - Kudos to you. True WISdom is very rare and even less frequently revealed. This one certainly deserves a complete reread from all those who are interested in Rolex history and are lacking in knowledge (i.e. me). If I were the owner of this watch, whether franken or gen, I would be one very proud owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POTR Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 Hey The Zigmeister! Would you still happen to have that vintage Spidel bracelet? Was/is it stainless or chrome? Or did he go for the 10K HGE for that two tone look? Straight or wave? Flat, channel, "I-bar", embossed or ?? I'm always looking for extra links... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted March 5, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 EDITED, so it doesn't sound "harsh"...please note I am playing the Devil's Advocate and presenting pics of the points raised, it's all in good FUN and not meant to OFFEND anyone or their opinion or anything else. Ok, I'm awake and here are the rest of the pictures I am willing to share. What I have tried to do, is focus on the points brought up as area's of contention, meaning that these items "could" be faked. I would like to add the following: other than POTR and myself, it doesn't seem as if anyone here has ever held, let alone seen a genuine vintage Miligauss. I searched for 2+ hours on the internet, and came up with nothing that would help me make an informed decision on this watch either way...nothing positive, or negative. Based on these facts, if you are prepared to state "It's a fake, anyone can engrave/stamp, whatever..." PLEASE support your "opinion" with facts. Otherwise your opinion is just that - an opinion with no facts - and why should I or anyone on RWG take your word and opinion as the truth over any other opinion? Simply because it's negative? Or because this is a "rare" watch and it's impossible to find it? Remember my 5508? Isn't that a "rare" watch...but I found one, and have it in my possession... So with that, I offer the following all in a good spirit of fun and interest, and playing the devil's advocate. Here are the main points I noted in these 79 posts, that could prove one way or the other the true nature of this watch. Point 1 "The letter "M" on the movement...anyone can engrave it..." Ok, so lets compare and look at the "M" in close detail, and compare it to the other letters we know are in fact engraved by Rolex on the bridges etc. Here is the "M" that identifies this movement as a Miligauss movement. Here is other lettering that we know is genuine Rolex, comparing the shape, patina, colour, depth, style, etc, I see no differences at all...do you? Dial side of movement engraving. Point 2 "Anyone can engrave the case (back)...that' easy to do" The caseback is NOT ENGRAVED, it's stamped, just like the genuine Rolex's. Does that in itself make it Genuine? Maybe not, but it does raise some questions. As for the comment, "the caseback is CLEAN, that proves it's a FAKE", I disagree, and I offer the following pictures. The 6205 belonged to my Uncle, a Navy Diver who used it for 30 years. The 5508 belonged to a hobby diver, who bought the watch new in 1962 and dove with it until 1984-85... Do these casebacks look "dirty" to you, or worn out or whatever??? No they are protected and inside the watchcase. Here is my GENUINE 6205 and 5508, compare these stampings to the Miligauss caseback. And now the STAMPED Miligauss. Engraved?? No look at the rounded edges of the metal near the numerals and letters... And of course lets not forget the outside view, looks worn out to me from years of use...don't see that on the NDTrading site, or Jewelleryandwatch cases... Point 3 "Movement and spacer and Faraday cage are fake..." Ok, so explain the following: fit, finish, and overall look, and note that the spacer ring goes on from the FRONT over the movement, is secured with movement screws, and then the dial seats on it and totally encloses the movement in the Faraday cage Stem location viewed through the ring into the keyless works. Point 4 "The LUGS" Here are various different views. Simply stating "It's a fake, look at the shape of the lugs..." means nothing, back it up with pics of a 6541 Miligauss from the same angles, so we can do our own comparison. Wear marks from years of end links rubbing the case. This can't be faked or happen overnight. Does that make it "real", no of course not, but it is an important point to note. Point 5 The ever popular between the legs picture...oops, I mean between the "lugs" of course... First up for comparison I offer a picture of my 1957 "6205 Brevet +" Rollie... that "5" sure looks the same... And now the Miligauss. Same? Different? Fake? If these markings are fake, how do you explain the caseback? If your prepared to say: "Caseback is genuine, Case is FAKE", then why are you not willing to accept that the dial has been replaced?? Of course no one would separate a dial from a watch, but people swap casebacks all the time...doesn't make sense does it? I think everyone agrees that the dial is questionable and bears an uncanny resemblance to the NDTrading one. Does that matter? My 5508 replacement bracelet was bought as a "Genuine" used one in the early '80's, bought in London UK no less... It was obviously not the correct one for the watch, so I send it to Ubi for analysis..."FAKE" is what he came back with. How could that be? Fake Rolex bracelets in the early '80's...maybe I guess, I don't know, but weird stuff can and does happen. That's it from me. I have nothing else to offer. And as stated before, I don't own the watch, and don't care either way what it is, or isn't. What I do know is what you see here, and how it all fits together and the finish of the parts. I look forward to the comments, and of course, your supporting data for your "Opinion" on the nature of the watch. If you can't present facts, then it's simply "your opinion" and considering that I am holding the watch in my hand, your opinion is no more valuable than mine is, because I have no supporting data either way that it's genuine, franken, or totally fake. What do I think? After looking at this and photographing the points I show above, here's my opinion, based on my supporting information I presented above. Caseback GENUINE Movement GENUINE Faraday cage GENUINE Hands GENUINE Case...not sure... but the engraving does look very similar to my 6205 Submariner... if it's fake, where did the caseback come from? Dial - Redial NDTrading Thanks for reading. RG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dluddy Posted March 5, 2008 Report Share Posted March 5, 2008 I didn't read a harsh tone? 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.