7206 Bracelet: Changing Endlinks

[Guinsburg]

Hi, I was able to source a pair of the vaunted "80" endlinks for my 1967 GMT.

Currently it's got 58's attached, and I'd like to know how hard of a job it is to switch? Is it something a decent watchmaker may do within the span of a visit?
I'd love to tackle that myself but not this time

*My understanding is that, those weren't designed to be switched, but not mission impossible either.

Thank you!

[Dan S]

Have you tried the 58s, there isn't much of a difference TBH.

[Guinsburg]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Have you tried the 58s, there isn't much of a difference TBH.

I have. Only thing is I always see comparable watches with 80's, but more importantly I've been told it wouldn't have such big gap underneath, the way it does now.

They could be wrong of course.. I just don't know any better.

[Dan S]

My concern is that your expectations may not be met by the #80 endlinks either, or you might even find you prefer the fit of the #58. Either can be made acceptable IMO, but I don't find either of them to be a perfect fit on my 1675 by any means. I would focus more on what is visible on the top of the lugs and less on underneath. If they fit reasonably well, you might want to quit while you're ahead.

If you look at the charts here, you'll see that some people think the 58 endlinks are equally (or more) suitable for a 1675 than #80 endlinks.
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=73646

This website claims that 58 endlinks are "correct."
https://gmtmaster1675.com/the-bracelet/

[Guinsburg]

Good points, and noted on the link (great resource, TY).

TBH i felt topside had room for improvement, too. Meanwhile my watchmaker's been harping on the 80s for a while, so I seized the opportunity.

I do suspect his motivation to be strictly purism vs aesthetic.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by Guinsburg

Good points, and noted on the link (great resource, TY).

TBH i felt topside had room for improvement, too. Meanwhile my watchmaker's been harping on the 80s for a while, so I seized the opportunity.

I do suspect his motivation to be strictly purism vs aesthetic.

But a purist would prefer the "correct" 58 endlinks. Springer's article also mentions it
https://www.gmtforum.com/viewtopic.p...ca48752409705c

As well as the gmtmaster1675 website
https://gmtmaster1675.com/the-bracelet/

Every time you start messing around with these bracelets, there's a chance to make things worse.

[Guinsburg]

Awesome, Dan, thank you for this.

I'll be referring to these often!

*Will probably leave it alone.

[TimeLord2]

My situation is different as I have a 1973 or so 1675/3 with a jubilee bracelet. It has an American oval link bracelet and the end links never fit very well, even though original to the watch and bracelet. I purchased some Swiss version 450 end links, paired them with my American oval link bracelet, and am very happy with the fitment. I don't know if there is another end link that might fit your watch better that would pair up with your bracelet and look original but this would definitely be the place to ask. My solution will obviously be frowned upon by the true collectors (yes, I did keep the originals…). I do like that rivet oyster, looks great!

[Guinsburg]

Hah yeah, this is the place indeed. I used to wear it on a Jubilee as well; I like to switch it up occasionally 😎👍

[springer]

58 end links have always been the accepted end link for the GMT. 80s were standard on Submariners but were sometimes found on GMTs.

I'd leave the 58s on it if it were my watch.

The large gap on the underside is "factory original." That is how they fit and looked back then.

[Guinsburg]

Originally Posted by springer

58 end links have always been the accepted end link for the GMT. 80s were standard on Submariners but were sometimes found on GMTs.

I'd leave the 58s on it if it were my watch.

The large gap on the underside is "factory original." That is how they fit and looked back then.

Perfect. Thank you for this

[TuRo]

May I congratulate you on 'vaunted', not used enough :-)

[Guinsburg]

Originally Posted by turo

may i congratulate you on 'vaunted', not used enough :-)

😂👍

[scooba]

Originally Posted by springer

58 end links have always been the accepted end link for the GMT. 80s were standard on Submariners but were sometimes found on GMTs.

I'd leave the 58s on it if it were my watch.

The large gap on the underside is "factory original." That is how they fit and looked back then.

Here is your answer OP