My 1963 GMT 1675 with Silver Dial?

[saxo3]

@PVR: your detailed dial photo comparison is convincing for me!

As a non-expert for these dials I would like to know how one can be sure that your 'reference' dial (bottom) is authentic?



During your search did you find another dial that looks very similar or 'identical' to the OP's dial?

What about your text comparison for the bottom part of Erpin's dial?

[Erpin]

Originally Posted by PVR

Ok, since I hate being wrong and hate being questioned, I went into my archives to look at other dials from this era. The serial is consistent with a 1962 watch and the exclamation point also puts the dial at 1962. So, I searched my archives and online and compared the print of the silver dial to the print of all other Gilt exclamation point dials I could find.

I stand behind this dial being refinished and relumed with weaker lume. I learned that exclamation point lume is weaker than earlier lume, but it still reads higher than Erpins Watch. I dont want to piss on the parade, but we are all here to learn and investigate so thats what I did.

Erpins dial has a crown/coronet that is nothing like any other example. The hole/opening on the bottom of the crown is much larger and open, compared to other printed dials that have a closed smaller hole.

in addition to that the OYSTER PERPETUAL writing below Rolex should not have any serifs in the fonts. In Erpins watch OYSTER PERPETUAL is written in Serif font. Didn't exist on any other 1675 Gilt dial from that era.

The "O" in rolex should also be slanted on an angle which it isn't on Erpins dial.
The "U" in the final word PERPETUAL should be further Left and on Erpins dial it lines up directly under the "X" in Rolex, which is incorrect.

I see other differences too with spacing and alignment, but this should be enough to show its not just a silver dial, its a completely different screen of text and fonts.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Whatever is your conclusion about my watch, i respect that. No one is trying to prove you wrong even myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1watch]

Regarding the pics of dial comparison above....

There are two types of known closed chapter ring exclamation dials on the 1675. The coronet opening and fonts appear correct for one of those types, similar to an example I used to own. I would still be curious if the geiger reading could be done again with the geiger positioned on top of the crystal and reported back to see if it's higher or the same as previously shared.

[Erpin]

The watch is at Rolex already so the verdict rest in their hands. For whatever its worth, I truly enjoyed the journey in trying to get a closure on the authenticity of the silver dial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PVR]

1watch: Please do provide a photo of the second closed chapter ring dial coronet you speak of and see if it has a coronet that looks like Erpins dial. Keep in mind, this is a 1962 dial with exclamation point (purported to be missing) so in order for it to be real it would have to have been manufactured in the same time period.

pauldavidthorpe: I put more credibility in myself than I do Rolex when it comes to vintage authentication. We got a bet. One pint of Lager. If I ever come to UK Ill buy one for you and if you're ever in NY you buy one for me. I'm not losing this bet and I like Cole Guinness.

saxo3: I have tons of pics in my archives and also checked online and all of them were the same as the one I posted so I just picked one that was similar in size and high quality. I saw a dozen dial photos and they were identical. I have no reason to think they are all fake, the black dial is genuine gilt print. I will do an AB for the bottom text to make you happy. :)

[PVR]

Ok so here is another comparison of the bottom text. Again, NO SERIFS on 1962 exclamation point dials text and SERIFS on Erpins dial.

Also, see the alignment issues in pink to show that the fonts do not align the same as on known factory Gilt dials.

So, this cannot be a 1962 printed dial on a special silver base because the entire font and spacing of the dial is unlike any other dial they produced at this time.

Unless of course it was a special one or two production printed dial that used completely different plates than every other dial.

I would also like to add that if there is any paperwork or engravings on inside of case back it might shed some additional light as exclamation point dials were only manufactured for the US market, so this watch had to be from a US dealer...

[saxo3]

Originally Posted by PVR

...I put more credibility in myself than I do Rolex when it comes to vintage authentication...

Thanks for the bottom text dial comparison

[TuRo]

Originally Posted by PVR

1watch: Please do provide a photo of the second closed chapter ring dial coronet you speak of and see if it has a coronet that looks like Erpins dial. Keep in mind, this is a 1962 dial with exclamation point (purported to be missing) so in order for it to be real it would have to have been manufactured in the same time period.

pauldavidthorpe: I put more credibility in myself than I do Rolex when it comes to vintage authentication. We got a bet. One pint of Lager. If I ever come to UK Ill buy one for you and if you're ever in NY you buy one for me. I'm not losing this bet and I like Cole Guinness.

saxo3: I have tons of pics in my archives and also checked online and all of them were the same as the one I posted so I just picked one that was similar in size and high quality. I saw a dozen dial photos and they were identical. I have no reason to think they are all fake, the black dial is genuine gilt print. I will do an AB for the bottom text to make you happy. :)

That's a deal I'm.... in NYC quite often - and not wanting to compound this whole 'real article' thing, but you need to drink Guinness in Dublin in my opinion (you only get the peat taste there for some reason) to have the legit article - I don't touch it in England...but that's another topic !

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by PVR

Ok so here is another comparison of the bottom text. Again, NO SERIFS on 1962 exclamation point dials text and SERIFS on Erpins dial.

Also, see the alignment issues in pink to show that the fonts do not align the same as on known factory Gilt dials.

So, this cannot be a 1962 printed dial on a special silver base because the entire font and spacing of the dial is unlike any other dial they produced at this time.

Unless of course it was a special one or two production printed dial that used completely different plates than every other dial.

I would also like to add that if there is any paperwork or engravings on inside of case back it might shed some additional light as exclamation point dials were only manufactured for the US market, so this watch had to be from a US dealer...

This is interesting. I looked around and found dozens of dials like the gilt dial shown. I was only able to find one exclamation dial with the serifs.

https://mentawatches.com/product/sol...et-gmt-master/

[PVR]

Dan S: This dial you found is very interesting, I have never seen one like it. I am going to assume it is genuine for the sake of this discussion. The fonts on THIS dial when compared to Erpins dial are nearly identical and spot on. The spacing the alignment and the fonts with serifs...all match up. The only anomaly and its a big one, is the crown coronet. It looks nothing like Erpins Coronet.

I am still standing firm on my position, but I am not as certain as I was that I "might" lose a beer to Paul David...

I also think the "O" in Rolex is a little off too now that I look closer..

[1watch]

Originally Posted by PVR

1watch: Please do provide a photo of the second closed chapter ring dial coronet you speak of and see if it has a coronet that looks like Erpins dial. Keep in mind, this is a 1962 dial with exclamation point (purported to be missing) so in order for it to be real it would have to have been manufactured in the same time period.

pauldavidthorpe: I put more credibility in myself than I do Rolex when it comes to vintage authentication. We got a bet. One pint of Lager. If I ever come to UK Ill buy one for you and if you're ever in NY you buy one for me. I'm not losing this bet and I like Cole Guinness.

saxo3: I have tons of pics in my archives and also checked online and all of them were the same as the one I posted so I just picked one that was similar in size and high quality. I saw a dozen dial photos and they were identical. I have no reason to think they are all fake, the black dial is genuine gilt print. I will do an AB for the bottom text to make you happy. :)

I know what the dial is, as I've owned an exclamation dial gilt 1675 in the past. The coronet has a wider opening, similar to the one posted by Dan S

[Xeramic]

Maybe, this helps...

(pics: tropicalwatch)



Comparison:




As an on-top print, the black execution is a little bit thinner/sharper than its anodized gilt brother, otherwise down to the tiniest details a perfect match... like stated already two months ago on VRF, this silver dial is authentic and made by Eggli-Weibel - however: if it belongs to this particular watch (or to any watch) is another question as it could not only be a special order but also a test printing dial completed with lume, a demo dial, or an unauthorized making by an employee; only Rolex can answer this, if at all.

Greetings,
Xeramic

[saxo3]

Outstanding contribution, Xeramic, as usual

https://www.rolexforums.com/showpost...0&postcount=82

[fmc000]

Xeramic -> TOP

[TuRo]

Originally Posted by fmc000

Xeramic -> TOP

Yes indeed. There are contributors of various knowledge levels and there isXeramic.

[Erpin]

Tnx Xeramic for your very concise analysis of the dial. Well explained.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Erpin]

Btw are exclamation marks dials exclusive only for the US market?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TuRo]

No it wasn't Eric, as exclamation, underline and double swiss sold across the board worldwide but USA as % of sales was double what it is now so many show up from USA and Europe 70% of market in 1960 to 1964 . Here's a UK purchased Explorer and GMT exclamation with box and papers Bristol and Watches of Switzerland. https://www.chrono24.co.uk/rolex/rol...75068.htm#gref
https://www.romainrea.com/en/collect...cg-box-papers/

[rootbeer7]

This is a truly wonderful thread. So much knowledge being shared by true experts & such respect for all opinions. Regardless of outcome, a remarkable watch.

[TimeLord2]

Yes! A very interesting thread and what a unique watch! Just along for the ride and very impressed with the expert opinions being offered here. This is why I continue to follow this forum—so interesting!

[1watch]

Excellent comparison above by @Xeramic... In addition to two exclamation variants with different font and coronet opening sizes, the black print on top of the dial of same variant would explain some difference as opposed to the negative relief print seen on the brass blank.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alwayshere]

great resource indeed.

Appreciate the experts that have chimed in notwithstanding there has been debate amongst them. We'll wait for Rolex to give the final verdict but feels like this one could be good.

[PVR]

"As an on-top print, the black execution is a little bit thinner/sharper than its anodized gilt brother"

Ok, if that is your answer for the smaller/thinner coronet crown opening, then why are the letters in every other part of the print FATTER? If the gilt printing would sharpen and thin out the coronet, then why would it make the fonts in ROLEX (for example) all fatter than the silver print dial?

[chocopeluche]

Originally Posted by PVR

"As an on-top print, the black execution is a little bit thinner/sharper than its anodized gilt brother"

Ok, if that is your answer for the smaller/thinner coronet crown opening, then why are the letters in every other part of the print FATTER? If the gilt printing would sharpen and thin out the coronet, then why would it make the fonts in ROLEX (for example) all fatter than the silver print dial?

Everywhere there is negative space, it shrinks.

[alwayshere]

Originally Posted by chocopeluche

Everywhere there is negative space, it shrinks.

I could believe this.

[CTech]

[QUOTE=PVR;12225740]"As an on-top print, the black execution is a little bit thinner/sharper than its anodized gilt brother"

This sentence is ambiguous and is hence misleading, but that might be due to translation issues.

What I think the sentence says is that the black print on the silver dial is thinner/sharper than the white print on the black dial.

That is certainly consistent with my observation that everything, including the coronet, the ROLEX print and the rest of the script, is thinner on the silver dial.

For the coronet on the silver dial specifically, if the print is thinner then the printing surrounding the hole at the bottom will be thinner and this will then lead to the hole being bigger.

Please correct me if this is the wrong interpretation of the quoted sentence, as this is just my view based on the supplied comparison photographs.

[007Sub]

I reckon this is a legit dial. Of course, only Rolex can confirm with authority. It may be argued that their acceptance of the watch is already partial confirmation of sorts since it's generally their policy to turn away inauthentic pieces.

Last year I brought a very late 5514 to RSC for the sole purpose of getting confirmation one way or another via their offer to service the watch.

OP please keep us posted on what they say when they get back to you. Great thread!

[Xeramic]

My sentence was not ambiguous, I’ve meant exactly what I’ve written – I’ve just expected you are aware of the basics of on-top-printing versus anodized printing ; my apologies, here some explanations:

Both printings are made with the same cliché, thus their perfect matching in regard to the font details (perfect in the meaning of an obvious accordance , tiniest – and I mean TINIEST – deviations are natural due to the printing procedures, see further below); however, what you finally perceive as “the print” are two different things...

With the common on-top printing, like with the black on the silver dial, the color lacquer gets printed (stamped if you prefer) on the surface – done, font appears thin and sharp (as thin and sharp as the cliché’s condition allows).

For the anodization of a gilt dial, an initial printing gets made the very same way, just with a temporary placeholder lacquer (a so-called masking) on the brass dial plate – same thin font, same sharpness (at least in general – but to be most precise: slightest deviations thinkable due to different lacquer consistencies, different surfaces, different conditions of the cliché during its lifetime, different conditions of the printing machine during its lifetime or different printing machines at all, different cares/skills for the printing execution, and different environment conditions like air humidity etc. during the printing); thus, up to this point the two printings are more or less the same; but then, the dial plate gets immersed in an anodizing bath containing a black lacquer which gets electrolytically adhered to the brass except where the mask prevents that; the placeholder lacquer gets chemically washed off *, and the glossy transparent finish lacquer comes on top (and sometimes an additional white printing on the latter).
* theoretically, the placeholder lacquer might have been transparent, stayed in place and became finally a part of the glossy coating - but although this sounds like the most elegant way, I'm not sure if the necessary properties of a placeholder lacquer allow transparency, and I also doubt because they would not have been able to verify the print result before of the anodization.


So, with the on-top printing, you see the direct stamp of the cliché, thin and sharp – while on the anodized dial, the “print” is just the space left out by the anodized black lacquer… a negative relief which only surrounds the initial placeholder printing and is therefore slightly larger when it comes to the outer lines and slightly smaller when it comes to inner lines (= shrinking inner areas, like with the coronet opening); further, the surface tension of the black lacquer can cause a bit softer forms around the placeholder printing (here we talk about dimensions below of a hundredth of a millimeter); ending up as a thicker gilt font with otherwise the same properties as printed in black on-top of the silver dial; the comparison pics in my former post show exactly the differences which you can await from one cliché used in two individual procedures.

I hope this clarifies the questions.

Greetings,
Xeramic

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Dan S

If you are referring to me, I find your comment offensive and inappropriate. I was simply expressing my own personal opinion about the relative value of a Rolex service vs. written authentication, and subsequently noting that if potential buyers find the Rolex service sufficient, then it is de facto sufficient. You and others may agree or disagree (as Eric and Aaron did). However, there is no question that it's preferable to express your own opinion without denigrating the opinions of other, and it's certainly not appropriate to call people names simply because they expressed an opinion.

You may wish to use the “ignore” button for him … I know many who have

[Erpin]

That was a master class lesson on dial printing and anodizing. Now i understand how a gloss gilt dial is made compared to the normal on top printing for matt dials with white or silver printing. Thanks Xeramic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk