The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Vintage Rolex Discussion

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 7 November 2019, 09:36 AM   #1
IOB
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Austria
Posts: 2
Icon20 Ref. 4768 Dato-Compax, Jean Claude Killy: Discrepancies and Questions

Dear All,

Very much hope that you can shed your expert insights about the following matter – I’m a newbie so please pardon my ignorance!

I’ve been doing some research into the Ref. 4768 Dato-Compax and the Jean Claude Killy watches.

Firstly, it is unclear whether the Ref. 4768 is, in fact, a “Jean Claude Killy”. There are various references to it as a JCK but there are also many that avoid including it under the JCK umbrella (including some auction houses (e.g. Sotheby’s and Phillips)). Can it be that JCK only includes the Oyster models (4767, 5036, 6036 and 6236) and not the 4768. What is your opinion on this?

The Ref. 4768 pictured here is my steel and gold version. I am seeking clarification about it and its anomalies/discrepancies with respect to other 4768s and dato-compax watches.

For example:

Do you think that the dial has been repainted, restored or modified in any way from the original factory version? Discrepancies between this dial and the “norm” include:

1. The word CHRONOGRAPHE not properly centred under ROLEX.

2. The font used on the sub-dial at 6 o’clock is different to that for the dials at 9 and 3 (e.g. number “3”).

3. The Tachymetre doesn’t have a scale. How can it be used? Notwithstanding, I have seen a picture of an Omega without the Tachymetre “scale” (see attached picture).

4. The words "ANTI-MAGNETIC" are missing from the lower part of the dial (- attached is a picture of another similar Rolex Killy dial, though).

Although the points listed above differ from the “norm”, I have seen supposedly untampered original dials with these “discrepancies”.

If these anomalies are true to the factory version, why did Rolex create such differences in the first place?

I was told by the seller (auction house) that the watch is confirmed by Rolex in Geneva as being authentic although nothing was stated by Rolex (Geneva) about the dial.

Can you see any non-original components in the picture (FYI, I haven’t opened up the back of the watch)?

What is your opinion about the “integrity” of the dial, the hands and the pushers? The crown has the Rolex crown on it.

Many thanks for your insights and feedback!
Attached Images
       
IOB is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

WatchShell

My Watch LLC

Takuya Watches

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2025, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.