briank996 Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Bought this from a brick and mortar with a good reputation. I recently took it to an AD to ask for an endlink and was supprised when they said that "they dont deal with fake watches" and handed it back. The first thing the woman said was that the crystal shouldn't be domed poly, WTF it's a 5513?? Then she commented that the case back didn't look right. After the crystal conversation, I would have written it off as her not knowing what the hell she was talking about, but looking at the spin pattern on the caseback it makes me wonder. All other 5513 pics I can find have had polished case backs. What do you all think? Have a look... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertrinaustin Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 (edited) Looks good to me (cgs, crown, bezel insert, lug holes, spring bars all look genuine) but I'm no expert. The only question I have is the "Swiss" on the dial. Is that right for the mid 80s? Edited March 19, 2006 by robertrinaustin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jraines87 Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Probably gonna have to refer to Nanug on this one.... He's the sub expert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briank996 Posted March 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Looks good to me (cgs, crown, bezel insert, lug holes, spring bars all look genuine) but I'm no expert. The only question I have is the "Swiss" on the dial. Is that right for the mid 80s? No, but I was told up front that it is a 'new' replacement from rolex which would make it correct in that aspect. It is just the 'lathed' look to the case back that has me worried. Come to think of it, I have never seen a rep sub with a pattern like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertrinaustin Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Maybe the caseback was replaced with the dial. It looks very clean to be about 20 years old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Interesting case back- I've never seen one like that- even on a rep. Of course the acid test is to take the case back off and check out the movt. That will tell you what you really have. You might go to a regular watchmaker and have him take the back off- it shouldn't be to expensive- $15-25 max- it's simple if you have the proper case back tool- which all watchmakers should. I paid $35 for a Bergeon set of rolex caseback openers and it's a must have if you're going to fool around w/ Rolexes or Rollie reps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber_Jones Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Get the damn case back already. I want to know!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Looks like genuine to me. The case looks good. Perhaps the watch came with replacement dial? It's kinda strange to see non-painted hour markers with vintage pearl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesbonk007 Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Could it be a mutiple modded rep ? not seeing the mvt,one can't really tell. dial looks more like 16800(oem dial) definitely don't look like any 5513. i ever saw before. james. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eunomians Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 I posted this reply on TRC. Nobody has responded to my post... So maybe it'll be helpful if I post it here. As a proud owner of a 5513... Here are my comments: The dial is a service replacement. I am unfamiliar with the white gold surrounds style of dial. My 5513 is a vintage 60s model with a matte dial. I cannot discern its authenticity. The rest of the watch looks brand new. My caseback is the same shape, but it does not have the polish scheme yours has (because mine is 40 years old). The underside of your lugs are brushed, etc... All this 'perfect' polish means to me that it must've been a NOS watch - or freshly polished. The bracelet looks brand new, too. To kinda sum it up, maybe the odd caseback polish scheme means that sombody went to town on refinishing the case. They went overboard and refinished the watch beyond facory specs. So, could be real but suffered a polish job by a crazy man. Crack open the caseback, you should see a gleaming 1520 movement. It should look new if the case is so new looking. Record the inner caseback numbers (example: III 82, meaning 3rd quarter 1982). Also check for AD service marks in the inner caseback. Then record the serial number between the lug. Look it up online to get the approximate date of manufacture. It should be a close match to the inner caseback marking. It doesn't have to be an exact year match, but it should be very close. If you did get it from a reputable source, then you could get yer money back if you do find it to be fake. Check all the info that I posted here. You will then know. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eunomians Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Looks fine to me. I see the following as having been replaced: New Luminova dial New hands Insert Clasp Caseback The caseback can be polished to eliminate the radial finishing. All of these items were most likely recently replaced with a service from an RSC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marrickvilleboy Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 if i spend alot of money on a genuine rolex, and i was told by my authorised dealer that it wasnt genuine, I WOULD GO TO THE NEAREST WATCHMAKER TO EXAMINE THE MOVEMENT. HOW HAS THIS NOT BECOME A FIRST PRIORITY TO BRIANK996? instead he's pondering about it and asking questions on the internet...hoping to find accurate answers from pictures given to us..... unbelievable.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briank996 Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 if i spend alot of money on a genuine rolex, and i was told by my authorised dealer that it wasnt genuine, I WOULD GO TO THE NEAREST WATCHMAKER TO EXAMINE THE MOVEMENT. HOW HAS THIS NOT BECOME A FIRST PRIORITY TO BRIANK996? instead he's pondering about it and asking questions on the internet...hoping to find accurate answers from pictures given to us..... unbelievable.... Sorry dude.. not pondering anymore, it is a gen ubiquitous hit the nail on the head. I don't know how he knew but all of that stuff had been replaced. The only thing I was unsure about was the case back, which is a gen which had engraving removed. Thanks very much to everyone who responded, I was reading your replies as they were posted but didn't really have any new information until today (Monday) thanks again y'all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber_Jones Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 What is this information - you have told us nothing other then it is gen - how did you find out this information? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briank996 Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 BTW ubiquitous, How did you know that the clasp was replaced? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber_Jones Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Beacuse is is a savant. WIS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briank996 Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Took it back to the store and had them open it up today, the movement is deffinatly real... The only thing in my mind that was in question was the case back. After arguing with the women at the AD that a 5513 SHOULD have a plastic crystal, she then went on a tangent about how the caseback should be shaped like he DJ from the same era. This is obviously wrong but it did get me looking at other case back pics, when I noticed the difference in finish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber_Jones Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 So did they apoligize? Sound like she was a [censored]! How did it pan out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eunomians Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Just like I had thought/posted. Enjoy. Too bad RSC no longer have 5513 matte dials. That would be a killer upgrade for yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briank996 Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 I didn't go back to the AD, I went back to the store I bought it from. The women at the AD was a real [censored] from the begining. Basically not even looking at the watch before handing it back and calling it a fake. How embarassing!! Anyway all she really acomplished was loosing a future customer. Really, after she looked up in her book that a 5513 should be plastic, I think it was all about saving face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briank996 Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Just like I had thought/posted. Enjoy. Too bad RSC no longer have 5513 matte dials. That would be a killer upgrade for yours. No doubt!! Thanks for your help as well Eunomians. I still find it funny that the people who know most about the gens hang out at a rep website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber_Jones Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 No doubt!! Thanks for your help as well Eunomians. I still find it funny that the people who know most about the gens hang out at a rep website. This is very true. I am not a rollie guy but there are many people here who know more then the Gen guys. I am more up on panerai. I would want to take the watch back to that [censored] and have then open it up to show here it is real - then I would tell her to suck it and leave. Question for rollie guys - what year would this watch be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briank996 Posted March 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 1986 to be exact Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber_Jones Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 thx. 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.