GMT 1675, Confusing Watch

[Billybob7]

GMT Master 1675

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I need help once again on my 1675 Gmt Master

I've purchased what was thought to possibly be a replica Rolex GMT Master...got a great price.

Upon inspection it's not a replica...but is a confusing Rolex
1. It's a 1560 butterfly calibur (1565 GMT)
2. Case has pointed crown guards
3. The oyster bracelet is a fold over locking clasp and must be after market as it is lacking any numbers on the clasp or end pieces.
4. Dial is gloss...it looks black in most lighting conditions, but when held at the right angle is cast a blue tint. the marking seem correct for the age and model. anybody ever seen this dial before?Rolex 1.jpg

Rolex 6.jpg

Rolex 7.jpg

Rolex 8.jpg

Rolex 4.jpg
5. Removing the bracelet, at 6:00 is says Stainless Steel, at 12:00 it says Registered Design...the serial # is very difficult to see as is the 1675 model.
Over all it's in very good shape and is keeping very accurate time.

[U5512]

Looks like the dial has been refinished and the markers have been relumed.

[maverick]

I would like to see a closer look at the dial. It is not confusing since Rolex made a "pointy CG' 1675 with gilt dials. Is the serial number close to 1.0XXXX? There is not way I can tell from the picture posted that the dial is not correct. Regards=)
Maverick

[Billybob7]

Originally Posted by maverick

I would like to see a closer look at the dial. It is not confusing since Rolex made a "pointy CG' 1675 with gilt dials. Is the serial number close to 1.0XXXX? There is not way I can tell from the picture posted that the dial is not correct. Regards=)
Maverick

Hi Mavrick,

I don't think it's a gilt dial...it's too blue when looked at at a slight angle...straight on it looks black and the printing looks more silver metalic.
plus everthing it too white, no patina.Rolex 3.jpg

Rolex 4.jpg

Rolex 5.jpg

The serial no# too worn to read as is the 1675...plus the stainless steel at 6:00 and Registered Design at 12:00 are located at the bottom of the case not on the top like others I've seen posted.

I'm thinking this watch about 1964/65 era.

thanks for your help
Bill

[mtl514]

I think the only genuine rolex part on this watch is the movement.

[crowncollection]

Hmm a very strange watch. I think I see many problems with this watch. Dial, insert, hands and i am undecided on the case, better photos needed, Springer is the Gmt master, I would love to see what he has to say on this one.

[springer]

Originally Posted by crowncollection

Hmm a very strange watch. I think I see many problems with this watch. Dial, insert, hands and i am undecided on the case, better photos needed, Springer is the Gmt master, I would love to see what he has to say on this one.

It looks like most of the issues have been addressed here already. The watch appears to be have an early 1960's PCG (pointed crown guard) case. The dial appears to have been refinished and the hands have been replaced. The case back does not have a date stamping which would also indicate that it was replaced at one time - but it does have several watchmaker notes etched or written on it from previous service. The band, which is not pictured here, is probably aftermarket if it does not have any type of identifiers on the underside of the clasp. If it has the Rolex coronet on the outer or visible side of the clasp, minus any markings on the clasp, it is either counterfeit or pieced together from genuine and counterfeit band parts.

Hope this helps you out.

[Billybob7]

Originally Posted by springer

It looks like most of the issues have been addressed here already. The watch appears to be have an early 1960's PCG (pointed crown guard) case. The dial appears to have been refinished and the hands have been replaced. The case back does not have a date stamping which would also indicate that it was replaced at one time - but it does have several watchmaker notes etched or written on it from previous service. The band, which is not pictured here, is probably aftermarket if it does not have any type of identifiers on the underside of the clasp. If it has the Rolex coronet on the outer or visible side of the clasp, minus any markings on the clasp, it is either counterfeit or pieced together from genuine and counterfeit band parts.

Hope this helps you out.

Thanks springer,
Your discription seems to follow what I was told about the watch prior to purchase...I paid $700 so I'm not feeling too bad.
I plan on adding a Jublee bracelet...haven't decided on a re-manufactured dial to match the white hands.
This is going to be worn not displayed and I'm guessing most of the value has gone but it's still a nice watch
thanks for your help.

[Mickey®]

Glad to hear you to it at a "great price"

[kooltzar]

Movement is real, so is the caseback although dating from the seventies. Whether the case is real is doubtful, as far as I know the crown guard models already had the serial number engraved below the STAINLESS STEEL text. If real than a very very early PCG case. Dial is definitely counterfeit, as it the cronometer lines have the wrong font and color of writing is also wrong. Original dial would have to be chapter ring gilt and with hyphen between Oyster and Perpetual and a service replacement dial would be white.

[77T]

Originally Posted by Billybob7

Thanks springer,
Your discription seems to follow what I was told about the watch prior to purchase...I paid $700 so I'm not feeling too bad.
I plan on adding a Jublee bracelet...haven't decided on a re-manufactured dial to match the white hands.
This is going to be worn not displayed and I'm guessing most of the value has gone but it's still a nice watch
thanks for your help.

Perhaps a NATO or leather strap would be a lot less $$$ spent on it?

[Billybob7]

Originally Posted by kooltzar

Movement is real, so is the caseback although dating from the seventies. Whether the case is real is doubtful, as far as I know the crown guard models already had the serial number engraved below the STAINLESS STEEL text. If real than a very very early PCG case. Dial is definitely counterfeit, as it the cronometer lines have the wrong font and color of writing is also wrong. Original dial would have to be chapter ring gilt and with hyphen between Oyster and Perpetual and a service replacement dial would be white.

Since my 1675 is a mix of Rolex and after market parts...I've decided to see if I can locate the correct dial re-manufactured...at least the watch will look correct.

Can any one send a picture of the correct dial...I'm going to go for one with no patina, since my hand are already white.

Thanks to all that have helped.

[Andrew Borge]

He initially thought that he purchased a fake watch. Why even discuss the matter with him?

[bayerische]

Case is fake. Dial is fake. Perhaps the caseback is real and the movement.

But not so smart advertising you were out to buy a COUNTERFEIT Rolex here. n:

[Vincent65]

looks pretty dodgy to me - relumed/painted dial and hands, and you could drive a bus through those lug-holes.

[Billybob7]

To all that feel my post should be removed...explination

I can see where I made my mistake on the post...I should have stated the seller thought the watch might have not been original. I used poor wording in the use of fake...SORRY...
Prior to purchase I had the chance to remove the case back and knew it was a 1560 movement...I was also sure of the dial not being original, as for as the remainder of the Rolex I wasn't sure, that is why I asked for other opinions.

I would like to make the attempt to return (resore) the watch back into what would be as close as possible to what it might have looked like when new, at this time that's the best I can do for this Rolex. It's no longe possibe to keep it as it should have been.

These seems to be controversy on the case, springer, says "The watch appears to be have an early 1960's PCG (pointed crown guard) case"...others think it's fake...still not sure

Once again thanks for those that have both critized and helped.

By the way...I've done pretty good over the years buying and selling Rolex'...this is my 2nd 1675 and I also had a 6200...see my other posts

[kooltzar]

Still don't know why you would want to buy another fake dial to replace this one. Ok, you first need to be sure about the case to make a worthwile investment into a real dial, but as stated before I doubt that the case is real, but then why have a completely fake watch (besides movement and caseback)? I don't get it.

[springer]

Originally Posted by kooltzar

Still don't know why you would want to buy another fake dial to replace this one. Ok, you first need to be sure about the case to make a worthwile investment into a real dial, but as stated before I doubt that the case is real, but then why have a completely fake watch (besides movement and caseback)? I don't get it.

I see nothing to indicate this old, worn-out GMT has a fake case. Nothing at all. Counterfeiters wouldn't waste their time trying to age a PCG case and then add a genuine movement. It has been over-polished and serviced with replacement parts and a refinished dial.

[Billybob7]

Originally Posted by springer

I see nothing to indicate this old, worn-out GMT has a fake case. Nothing at all. Counterfeiters wouldn't waste their time trying to age a PCG case and then add a genuine movement. It has been over-polished and serviced with replacement parts and a refinished dial.

All I'm attempting to do is to make this watch look as original as possible. I'm planning on wearing it...so I would rather have it look as it might have years ago...I relalize the colectors value has long gone...so it's the best I can do for this tired old Rolex. I'm sure not going to break it up for parts, so a restoration is all that's remaining.

One question I still have not had answered is the location of the s/n and inscriptions on the PCG case being reversed?

Any ideas springer??????

[bibaz]

fake dial

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by bayerische

Case is fake. Dial is fake. Perhaps the caseback is real and the movement.

But not so smart advertising you were out to buy a COUNTERFEIT Rolex here. n:

Originally Posted by Billybob7

To all that feel my post should be removed...explination

I can see where I made my mistake on the post...I should have stated the seller thought the watch might have not been original. I used poor wording in the use of fake...SORRY...

I can accept that explanation. Isn't $700 an awful lot for a watch thinking it's fake?