ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
15 December 2017, 04:54 AM | #1 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 805
|
I'm pretty sure this is fugazi
|
15 December 2017, 05:31 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,349
|
According to his 2 most recent feedbacks he's a "bad guy" anyway...
|
15 December 2017, 05:32 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Watch: 16710, 16628
Posts: 7,757
|
Watch looks ok in the pictures..
__________________
GMT II 16710 TRADITIONAL ( D- Serial #) ROLEXFANBOY P-Club Member #4 |
15 December 2017, 05:40 AM | #4 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Seiko #SRK050
Posts: 34,447
|
I agree, but they're really bad pictures.
If a seller can't bother to take decent pictures, it's a bad sign in and of itself.
__________________
JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner |
15 December 2017, 06:33 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 67
|
Same guy has a BLNR for sale that he took much better photos of.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Rolex-GMT-M...QAAOSwbtNaKW-F |
15 December 2017, 07:34 AM | #6 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 805
|
I could be wrong, but would a 16710 have this lug width?
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.