Request for better knowledge than mine … 1675 GMT 1,9x series fuchsia

[Dadnatron]

I was finally able to upload pics of the watch. Purchased of Chrono24.

I’d appreciate thoughts on legitimacy as I have a few more days to send it back if it’s not authentic.

Came from San Diego Jeweler/watch store. They stated they had their watchmaker go through and ensure authenticity and that it’s running well. I don’t think it was a full service. They provided a value quote for insurance at about twice what I paid for it.

It has no bracelet, just the cheap NATO in
al link with 50 ends that I’ll put on it if it’s an authentic watch.

1,9x series
1. Lume appears consistent and has absolutely no charging with UV. It glows a bit, but no illumination without active UV. ie no glow.
2. Hands match dial for lume appearance and intensity
3. Long E Mark 1 dial seems good to my eye and research
4. No polish
5. Insert it faded equally on back

I could not remove back with ball, but I have a Rolex case back remover on order and should be here this weekend. I’ll post additional pics when I can.

C41CC7A1-0E5D-430E-85C1-E4C23821A4F6.jpeg

32C212D8-5FA2-42B0-A989-6065D66D7A5F.jpeg

CC095383-60D6-42A0-97AC-4395107279CC.jpeg

458E6861-7A64-46C4-A4C9-21F5B34F563C.jpeg

819F74CA-3870-4DC6-B83A-C8E5919CCE37.jpeg

A5820D31-F2DF-4145-B1FA-31399B88E8CF.jpeg

F642FC40-C0C3-45F6-8504-BFC7B6FA574D.jpeg

EFCC8E45-105D-4960-ADE2-ABA167810656.jpeg

2B2219C0-DB9F-45E0-9673-73E38971BFC3.jpeg

152C9668-6B1C-45BC-A2AE-BDE8147FDAD6.jpeg

[CTech]

There are a few things that don't look right, but they could just be as a result of the lighting or angle of the photo.

The position of the spring bar hole on the 11 o'clock lug looks odd and so I would dispute the "no polish" claim, if that really means never polished. It looks to me that the case has been polished, as you would expect for a watch that is over 50 years old, but the last polish was a long time ago and the watch has had a lot of wear since.

That 11 o'clock lug also looks slightly bent down as the angle of the bottom doesn't match the angle of the 7 o'clock lug and there appears to be a slight gap between the top of the lug and the bottom of the bezel.

The length or depth of the grooves or serrations on the bezel seems to vary around the periphery, for example the grooves at the 3o'clock position (6 on the bezel insert) seem to be almost across the full depth of the bezel whereas they are a lot shorter elsewhere.

It's possible these things are OK and the photos are the problem, but I would look a bit more closely to try and determine what is going on.

Also, what is wrong with the spring bars - wrong type, worn ends?

[Dadnatron]

I cannot say it was never polished, I meant not recently ie for this purchase.

Spring bars are just what came with it. They don’t fit, that is certain.

As. Far as the lugs… again, I cannot say. To me, after inspection they look as I’d expect, but this isn’t what I do. Perhaps the photo warped them a bit.

It’s a 54yo watch so in reality, I guess there could have been a bend with some crazy antic over that time. I just don’t see it upon my inspection.

I appreciate your eyes though.

Where would be a good place for spring bars for this? Would my AD be likely to seek me a few?

[Arnozerosix]

Originally Posted by Dadnatron

I cannot say it was never polished, I meant not recently ie for this purchase.

Spring bars are just what came with it. They don’t fit, that is certain.

As. Far as the lugs… again, I cannot say. To me, after inspection they look as I’d expect, but this isn’t what I do. Perhaps the photo warped them a bit.


Where would be a good place for spring bars for this? Would my AD be likely to seek me a few?

of course spring bar are wrong, but this is something any watchmaker will have.
Watch is nice, and well maintained, i think it is not "unpolished" (typical bottom lug shape after polishing).

the light is in fact strange.
-looks like the crown is not centered between the CGs
-looks like the top left lug hole is very close the the chamfer (top of the lug)
-the serial looks ok
-the shape of the "6" of the 1675 looks weird but i wouldn't worry about it (pantograph is not a sharp tool that brings consistent result).

i am not an expert of gmt so i won't risk any comment on the dial...
but the case looks genuine- i would anyway recommend to open the case back to confirm...

[Dadnatron]

I had an issue as I set time. I’m going to have to work with seller for service otherwise it’s going back.

First, I’m not certain of how the mechanism works on these old GMTs, but to set time forward, the crown on this watch rotates counter clockwise. Is this correct? Turning it clockwise results in hands rotating backwards.

When setting it, turning the crown counterclockwise, the stem ‘unscrewed’ or appears to have done so.

Additionally the date would not set. Something is fishy and until a CW21 watchmaker services it and says it’s authentic… it’s going back. Upsets me, as the seller stated they had a ‘very experienced watch team’ ensure it was in working condition and keeping time. I have a feeling the internals are completely wrong. I am suspecting they screwed the back down extremely tight to discourage easy checks.

I’ve already contacted Chrono24 to hold escrow.

[TimeLord2]

Originally Posted by Dadnatron

I had an issue as I set time. I’m going to have to work with seller for service otherwise it’s going back.

First, I’m not certain of how the mechanism works on these old GMTs, but to set time forward, the crown on this watch rotates counter clockwise. Is this correct? Turning it clockwise results in hands rotating backwards.

When setting it, turning the crown counterclockwise, the stem ‘unscrewed’ or appears to have done so.

Additionally the date would not set. Something is fishy and until a CW21 watchmaker services it and says it’s authentic… it’s going back. Upsets me, as the seller stated they had a ‘very experienced watch team’ ensure it was in working condition and keeping time. I have a feeling the internals are completely wrong. I am suspecting they screwed the back down extremely tight to discourage easy checks.

I’ve already contacted Chrono24 to hold escrow.

Yes, on a 1570 movement the crown does rotate counter clockwise to set the time forward but you can also set the time clockwise going backwards if you are close to the date that way. As you may or may not know, given your comment, the date is only set by going through a full 24 hour rotations. There is no quick set date function. You have to keep rotating in 24 hour cycles to advance or retreat the date. The date wheel should turn over immediately at about 12:00PM give or take a few seconds. It does not go slowly over the course of a few hours. The older GMTs like yours, does not have a true GMT function. The GMT hand is slaved to the 24 hour hand cycle. The only way to show a second time zone is via the rotating bezel. Oh, and the first click on the crown pulling out is where you wind, second is for advancing time and date. I/m sure you already knew the first part. Good luck, sounds like it still needs a service if the crown fell off, and "keeping time" is a relative statement.

[XavierM]

Hi,

Not an expert but an happy collector learning everyday :)

At first glance, everything looks legit except the crystal (profile shape and magnification makes me wonder)
Sharp pictures of the lume would be needed to make a solid opinion on wether it was relumed or not.
Bezel with teeth having different lengths is not uncommon in this era from my little experience
Beautiful insert
Would expect an open 9 date wheel
From my personal experience, if the seller is not a watchmaker, the watch is most likely not serviced but not a big issue… 600-800$ and you’ll have the choice of the right watchmaker to do the job and a beautifully working watch :).

Wait for some expert opinion before sending back the watch ;)

Kind regards,

[CTech]

To be honest, I don't think it is a great loss to the OP to return this, never see it again or have anything more to do with the seller.

Anyone who tries to sell a watch with those spring bars in it clearly isn't somebody who knows what they are doing, and to claim that a watchmaker has said it is running well is obviously ludicrous in the light of the new information from the OP.

I might consider this as a project watch if I could buy it at a reasonable price from either the original owner or somebody who was representing it accurately, but I would not have considered it with all its issues from a dealer with an inaccurate description and an overinflated valuation certificate.

[KY..]

I would ask myself what do I expect with the watch for the amount I paid?
If it satisfies your expectations for the money you spent, then keep it.
If it doesn’t check all your boxes, give it back for a full refund.