Help with this 1675 GMT

[Chadridv]

My buddy might be pulling the trigger on this. Any potential issues jump out? He’s been told that everything is time correct, except the bracelet which is not pictured here anyway.

Ref. 1675
Serial: 1.4mil

Thanks everyone!

[sensui]

Dial and insert way too late for that serial.

[Chadridv]

Originally Posted by sensui

Dial and insert way too late for that serial.

Thank you for the insight my friend!

Would you say this with 100% certainty? What indicates later time frame on the dial and insert? Many thanks!

[roh123]

Originally Posted by Chadridv

Thank you for the insight my friend!

Would you say this with 100% certainty? What indicates later time frame on the dial and insert? Many thanks!

1.4 should have a gilt dial and small gmt hand. Also another insert. There is no uncertainty regarding this. This example is far from untouched.

[albaserver]

Originally Posted by roh123

1.4 should have a gilt dial and small gmt hand. Also another insert. There is no uncertainty regarding this. This example is far from untouched.

+1

[brandonwahl]

Originally Posted by Chadridv

Thank you for the insight my friend!

Would you say this with 100% certainty? What indicates later time frame on the dial and insert? Many thanks!

Check out this great dial variation thread, which will give you serial number ranges for the different dials. Incredibly helpful.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthre...ight=gmt+dials

[sensui]

Originally Posted by Chadridv

Thank you for the insight my friend!

Would you say this with 100% certainty? What indicates later time frame on the dial and insert? Many thanks!

Yeah like the gents above stated....for sure it should be a gilt dial instead of a matte dial (and a later matte dial @ that) with a small GMT hand. The insert is too late because in general the font of the number is wrong in terms of thickness/ovalness of the 8's etc. Good thing you posted things here first.

[Kingface66]

Your buddy should know that the person offering to sell it to him either doesn't know much about these references (1675s), or is purposely misleading him. Either way, your buddy should know that, as roh123 insinuated, everything is NOT time correct at all.

[Chadridv]

Wow! Incredible stuff friends. Thank you all.

[springer]

With sellers like this, it isn't any wonder why there are so many misrepresented watches being offered out there for sale.

[omitohud]

As mentioned the watch was misstated as All “time” correct for the reported serial, which it is not. But if it’s being represented as serviced with Rolex parts, then it makes a lot of sense. Correct dial, hands, insert and probably crown for late 70’s replacement. Or maybe your friend got the serial wrong? Anyway, it’s still a very handsome watch albeit not all parts original. Such a nice dial with matching hands and insert. Depends on the price I guess. I wouldn’t mind wearing such a beautiful Pepsi as long as I didn’t overpaid for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chadridv]

Originally Posted by omitohud

As mentioned the watch was misstated as All “time” correct for the reported serial, which it is not. But if it’s being represented as serviced with Rolex parts, then it makes a lot of sense. Correct dial, hands, insert and probably crown for late 70’s replacement. Or maybe your friend got the serial wrong? Anyway, it’s still a very handsome watch albeit not all parts original. Such a nice dial with matching hands and insert. Depends on the price I guess. I wouldn’t mind wearing such a beautiful Pepsi as long as I didn’t overpaid for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

good points! thank you. I'll pass along the message.