What do you make of this Milgauss? Real or Rolex?

[Watchmeister]

Beyond what I have learned from this loop regarding earlier Rolexes I have learned one other important thing. Never buy a vintage one. You will never know whether it is real (or for that matter what would constitute real) unless you are buying from the original owner.

[RWG Technical]

Why the harsh tone - you wanted info and discussion, that's what you got. If you don't care for other opinions as you stated - then why did you ask?!

Did you not see what I stated here in the preamble of my post:

So with that, I offer the following all in a good spirit of fun and interest, and playing the devil's advocate.

Of course I care for other opinions, but since we are trying to decide on the authenticity of the watch (or not) what good is an opinion, without any facts?

Playing the "devil's advocate" means I am going to present evidence that supports and questions the points raised as to why the watch is not genuine.

"...Good spirit of fun and interest..." is not what I consider a "Harsh tone".

Points were made that the watch is fake for a number of reasons, therefore I have taken the OPPOSING point of view, and I presented arguments against these points.

You had mentioned that anyone can "engrave" here...

Getting movements engraved correctly is jokingly easy - everybody with a Pantograph can do it. Engraving the case - the same.

I took that to mean the case and caseback and movement could be engraved easily and correctly.

You had no problem in making statements that question the origin of the watch, but as soon as I post pictures on these points that may prove otherwise, I'm the one with a "harsh" tone...

This is why I said what I did in the introduction, so that no one would get offended. Make believe it's a court case, and I am the Defense lawyer arguing for my client...it's not meant as a personal attack against anyone who has commented either way, it's simply showing these items that were questioned and asking for evidence either way, prove it a fake, or prove it genuine, or maybe it can't be proved either way...

Points were brought up, I have shown more detailed pictures, compared them to the only vintage Rollie's I have, and stated what I think based on that comparison. I am not angry or upset, or did it in any way meaning to be "Harsh"...

RG

[POTR]

Don't say that I base my opinions sans facts. I have more ref pics than you would believe.

OOO! Demascening on the Faraday cover, is that mild steel?

What's up with that fat ass slab side? And uphill engraving, like "DESIGN" is trying to climb stairs... Nice wear on them there lugs though.

[RWG Technical]

Don't say that I base my opinions sans facts. I have more ref pics than you would believe.

If this is true, why did you wait until today, 3 days after I put up the original post, to show your pictures? I think that's a bit harsh, don't you?

If I take the approach towards your pictures as you have towards my pictures, I will say this:

All I see in these pictures is a case that looks similar to a rollie case, with a cover of some sort over the movement (is there a movement under the cover?? I can't tell), from the side view I see "6541" but I can't tell the quality of the engraving...

I don't see any movement, I don't see the dial, nothing else that tells me that this is a genuine 6541, certainly based on those photo's alone, I have no idea what I am looking at.

Lets use the same standard for everyone. Are you suggesting that your pics are of a Genuine 6541?

RG

[POTR]

Thanks for the updated pictures... that burnished look in the middle of the case back disappeared in the close up... must not be that much wear at all.

I, for one, love that case. It just looks right. However, Rep posted an interesting pic of a 41 that looks almost right, which may be of a newer vintage.

Interesting...

The Front of Movement pics are interesting too... the area on the side, next to the keyless works appears darker, and the mid case cage has a bit missing at the same spot. Which gives a very good potential reason for a dial change, if it was changed. Although it would be a rather convoluted set of circumstances..

The crown would have to be in wind or set position.. and touched to or caught on something with electrical potential, allowing current to enter the cage through the stem, the completed circuit would create a similar scorch to the movement and blow out on the mid case if the shortest path to ground was through the dial, case front and the bezel. And as luck would have it, the retaining ring at about 7:30 shows a spot that looks like "weld" damage...

The only other contact point / potential completion of circuit would be the button on the cage cap, the caseback and then the wearer.

Back when I was a full time tech, I had a few similar experiences working inside live CRT monitors adjusting them after repair, and I can say RF voltage HURTS, and can smoke a watch if it's case gets in the way.

An absent minded scientist or tech could have retired his "indestructible" watch early in this way.

[southcoast68]

Ok, here is another possible scenario (no fact to back this up, just speculation). Knowing

that any Milgauss is becomming a high dollar peice worldwide and that value increases when all

original paper work is still with the watch, consider the following.

It was seen on the TZ post Freddy refered to that a collector had a 6543 (one of 80 supposedly),

and sold that watch in favor of a 6541 that had all of its paper work, since the '43 did not have

paper work. He/she regretted the sale, but none the less passed on one model for another based

on proper history and paperwork. So, consider this, a watch collector has a 6541 in great

running condition that has all of its paperwork in tact. However the bezel is in poor condition

from use and the dial is badly faded. Along comes the 6541 in question here, it has a perfectly

aged, clean dial and a beautiful bezel and insert (I continue to hold the bezel and insert

a point of interest here just because of the age of these watches and the immense cost to

replace one of these bezels with NOS parts since Rolex is surely not still producing these),

however, this 6541 has no history or paperwork. Off come the dial and bezel to be used on the watch

with all the history, and this watch gets a replacement dial. The bezel is not replaced since

it would be more expensive to do so, and at this stage, the watch can be re-sold to someone

else. Its still sold for a good amount of money, but still far less than what it would go for

if it were complete, running and with authentication. The new buyer accepts the watch based

on the fact that it is a Milgauss that needs restoration and service. The replacement dial

is not noticed as an issue since it is viewed throught an old scratched crystal and the bezel

is not viewed as an issue since it is on old watch and the cost of restoration would include

funds for bezel replacement. After a few grand of restoration work, the owner has a watch that

could still be worth 5 figures even without paper work. Meanwhile, the previous owner gets

his watches restoration completed with genuine parts whaich cost nothing since the donor watch

they came from gets re-sold for an amount that even covered the cost of the replacement dial.

Another possible scenario is that the watch in question was put together using genuine parts

obtained from ebay, watch conventions, old watchmakers stock, etc. Even a genuine case could

be found in a watchmakers stock, after all, these watches are from the late fifties, and in

that amount of time, anything can happen. Various parts from various Milgauss's (or Milgi??)

without any authentication on their own, come together to form a desirable collectible timepeice.

[RWG Technical]

I'll just touch on these points:

My 5508 and my 6205 have no "watchmaker" notes engraved into the casebacks, weird I know, but they are clean as you can see in the pics.

I am not trying to prove I am right, since I have nothing to gain. And I willingly posted all the pics of the area's that may help determin what this is, or isn't.

I didn't show the back of the dial, because it's identical to the NDTrading one someone posted, it's identical which means aftermarket.

As for the rest, for sure the movement is genuine Rolex, "M" seems to be authentic as well, the rest appears to be genuine, but I have no way of knowing...and I am not sure if these pics will prove it one way or the other.

I have nothing to be careful about concerning this watch, it's not mine, what the owner does once he gets it back, is not my problem or concern. But I doubt if I will ever see one in the shop again soon

But I have to say, that this dial of mine...

Looks a lot like this dial on your genuine one...

RG

[Ylfig]

I feel like I

[FxrAndy]

But I have to say, that this dial of mine...

Looks a lot like this dial on your genuine one...

RG

Thats interesting, why do we have extra lume dots on the chapter ring on the second pic, all the other dials i looked at the other day i dont remeber seeing any of them!

But even more interesting to me and only the original designer of the milli could answer is why have luminous markers at all when the daufine hands are not on some 6541?????

Is he around, the designer that is ?

[POTR]

Hey Andy... want to be even more confused?

Look real close at "Rep's Gen" (the bottom one) and notice that those are not quite the dauphine hand's that we are used to seeing, those are "fat baton" hands... (and both the minute AND seconds are longer than the outer track, for those who were interested in such things)

There are even weirder things on "Rep's Gen," but I was kind of waiting to see if anyone else would say anything.. like taking notice of the other place the "drunk pantograph operator" was apparently working... (and yes, the same type of engraving "issue" appears on The Zigmeister's watch in question, only it is much more pronounced (worse) on Rep's...)

[POTR]

Rep, do YOU need a reality check? I didn't call your's a fake... I simply said it had some weird issues, one that was the same as, but even more pronounced than The Zigmeister's example...

As far as adding up flaws and calling anything fake, I don't exactly see things that way... I appreciate a lot of different flaws for what they are...

Your DESIGN engraving does indeed run up hill...

Your watch is wearing extra long "fat baton" hands (were is another example of that?)

Your watch has a cage back is polished and demascened. Fsckin' awesome... but weird.. is the f l a n g e of the mid cage demascened like The Zigmeister's?

other things I prefer to leave off the list...

You want issues, your watch has issues... more than The Zigmeister's example...

What would be really interesting is taking the whole bezel off your example and taking a front and a side shot to match The Zigmeister's as closely as possible, to see any if any real differences appear here with the cases.

Most of those issues, and more like fat cases, straight vs. curved vs. too curved PLUS every shaped coronet mouth imaginable versus each other, well those I generally chalk up to variations in artisan's technique and the vagaries of manufacture.

Of course, that piece of oddly folded paper, which could have come from anyone's color laser or thermal wax printer, that doesn't show me Rolex's usual "we don't offer appraisal but our current model's estimated price is...." statement, is absolute proof of authenticity. We all know how much harder it is to fire up Word, cut and paste and hit print, than it is to successfully fake a vintage watch...

*Why in the hell is F L A N G E censored?

[freddy333]

Ziggy -- Thank you for taking the time to take & post the new pics. These shed new light on the subject & only enforce what I thought already:

Gen movement (impossible to tell whether the bridge & plate signings are original or were added by someone like Phong without having the watch appraised by Rolex, but I will be positive & assume the movement is 100% gen), NDtrading dial & aftermarket case/caseback (lug scratches aside (scratches can be added in a matter of minutes), the engravings between the lugs look, to me, to be of recent vintage).

Since a watch fitted with an aftermarket dial would be rejected outright by Rolex, why not do the next best thing - post a few of these pics of the watch on TZ & poll some of the experts there for their opinion. If Dowling & a few of the other senior experts give this watch the thumbs-up, that would be good enough for me. Ziggy, are you game?

[FxrAndy]

OK calm down every one, we are all learning, even when the most lerned of us still askes advice, what do we prove? that we can type with more force!

This is a very complex subject with more misteries than a crime story on fox, Ziggy showed us for a bit of interest, he has no agenda as far as i know we have aske and he has shown as much as he feels he can, lets join our knoledge not bash heads against each other.

@ POTR i was refering to the hands of the ziggy watch, i know what daufine and batton hands are. I posted a retorical question, unless the designer is here?

[RWG Technical]

Well I thought I was done with posting any further information, but as I was assembling the watch tonight, I noted a few other items that I thought would be of interest.

Have a look at the balance assembly, do you see it???

Yes? No? How about now, do you see what I just noticed??

Then I had a good look at the case and ring and fit and finish, it's really nice, what do you think...the fit of the rotor to the case ring and the cover, couldn't be more spot on as far as I can see.

Perfectly fit in the case, no gap between the case and the ring or the movement, and this area here, is machined and matches the side of the case EXACTLY all the way around...impressive at least to my eyes.

As for posting on TZ, I am not sure if I am prepared to do this, it's not my watch after all, and I don't want to do something that the owner of the watch would not agree too.

After all of this, I have certainly learned a lot, when the watch arrived it was "Ok, another vintage Rollie to restore and get running again...no big deal..." but it seems as if this one is probably the second most interesting vintage rollie I will ever have the priveladge to hold and see in person (the first being my 5508 of course).

Thanks everyone.

RG

[Guest carlsbadrolex]

This entire thread reminds me of something that occurred in 1994 while I worked part time in a pawn shop to supplement my military income. A beat to hell, very old Rolex fell out of pawn and the owner knew NOTHING about vintage Rolex watches and almost as little about the modern ones. Since I had already been collecting watches for a few years I spent a few days looking into it and found one reference to a god square cased Rolex chronograph. It is called the Gabus ref. 8206.

It was in HORRIBLE condition, but all original. The dial was very aged and showed possible water damage, the crystal was scratched severely, and a pusher was missing. The watch did however run for very short periods of time.

While doing research I found a website run by Mr. Jonathan Halliwell, After several emails, telephone calls and faxes back and forth we decided to sell the watch to him for $17k. He wired the money, we wired the watch and within a month the watch was on his website fully restored for $46k. It was the rarest and most valuable Rolex I have ever had the privilege of having. I made a hefty $5k bonus on that sale (we had loaned $500 on the watch).

It seems that the website is not nearly what it used to be. He had about 50 rare rolex watches listed for sale at the time... Ours was the most valuable. If I recall correctly, we were later told that there had only been about 75 of this particular watch ever made.

I think you have an extremely rare and beautiful watch there... Congratulations on even being able to see such a watch in person, much less be tasked with bringing it back from death!!!