Need some input on 1655

[thomasclark]

been lurking for a long time. finally signed up for an account. most of my experience is in early 70's seiko chronos, but starting to wade into rolex. well, more like jump in head first. can anyone who is more educated than me give me some feedback based on this photo. something to me looks off with the coronet and the 12:00 marker - the spacing just looks off - not sure what it is. serial is 302,xxx

i've looked at this page for reference, and looked at the serial guides. looks like the case, based on that serial, would be a '71, but the bezel looks to be MK2 based on centering of the numbers. something just doesn't feel right. not an ebay deal. i know the seller, and he's very reputable, my concern isn't with it being a fake since i'll have time to take to an AD to open up and check the movement. concern is incorrect dial for a '71 year 1655.

any help is greatly appreciated. will post photo from tapatalk in a second.

[thomasclark]

Thanks in advance for any help/input

[thomasclark]

argh, why can't i post a photo?

[thomasclark]

https://twitter.com/1stand10burger/s...697153/photo/1

won't even let me post a link in html, so for now, i've posted it on one of my twitter accounts.

[Wing Zero]

Here, let me help you out

[thomasclark]

thank you. every time it ended up awaiting mod's approval. probably b/c i'm new.

[Beaumont Miller II]

R u n

[dat_watch]

I would stay away, the dial is clearly not genuine. Look at Stefano Mazzariol's work on 1655 dials

[jdmi32]

Everything about that watch is wrong.

[thomasclark]

thanks, i had actually been looking at Stephano's site w/ those images, that's what led me to ask for second opinions. just wanted confirmation on what i thought i was seeing.

[pablofields]

Originally Posted by thomasclark

not an ebay deal. i know the seller, and he's very reputable,

Reputable for representing stuff like this as authentic???

[watchcrank]

lots to run away from :-(

[thomasclark]

Originally Posted by pablofields

Reputable for representing stuff like this as authentic???

that's what's got me confused about the deal.

either way, he's sending it for me to inspect prior to purchase, so not out anything for looking.

thanks everyone for the input.

[pablofields]

Originally Posted by thomasclark

that's what's got me confused about the deal.

either way, he's sending it for me to inspect prior to purchase, so not out anything for looking.

thanks everyone for the input.

Not to beat a dead horse, but why even take the risk of having the watch in your possession? It's clearly not authentic in major respects yet you say he is representing that it is. What if you accidentally drop or damage it while you are inspecting it? Aren't you putting yourself at needless risk of having the seller claim he sent you a genuine 1655 and you should pay him the fair market value of a genuine 1655?

I'd listen to the experts here who are advising to walk...actually run...away from this watch. Absolutely no benefit in having it in your possession while the owner maintains it is a genuine piece, IMHO.

p.s. an AD might be able to tell you if the movement is an authentic Rolex but other than that the average AD doesn't possess the knowledge of vintage Rolex to spot all of the problems with a questionable 1655.

[goog53]

I agree with Pablofields. Why would you even take possession of the watch and what kind of seller sends a watch for someone to inspect for free. When John says RUN, I would listen. Always buy the seller! John is the authority on 1655s for me and is the person who advised me. Mine says hi

[waiting]

Originally Posted by goog53

I agree with Pablofields. Why would you even take possession of the watch and what kind of seller sends a watch for someone to inspect for free. When John says RUN, I would listen. Always buy the seller! John is the authority on 1655s for me and is the person who advised me. Mine says hi

This is what always scares me about giving return policy to people, what if they swap my watch out? I guess the reverse of what is going on here. I do agree with the crowd you don't need possession of it never know what may happen.


On a side note I once sent my watch to Salty for inspection before getting any payment.