ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

QueueCumber · 15 December 2013, 01:44 PM

Hello experts, friends or both!

What do you think of this red 1680:

http://m.ebay.com/itm/360813154065?cmd=VIDESC

Thanks!!

Justso · 15 December 2013, 02:09 PM

Stay away.

Bracelet & crystal are aftermarket. A 9315 bracelet does not have a crown on the flip lock. Crystal is bad. Case back is problematic.

QueueCumber · 15 December 2013, 02:30 PM

Thanks!

007Sub · 15 December 2013, 04:31 PM

Lugs are mangled. Look elsewhere.

bayerische · 15 December 2013, 09:09 PM

"Original" is surely up for debate...

Vincent65 · 15 December 2013, 09:42 PM

No such thing as a "60's" feet first either…

3.7 would put one at around 1974, but that thing is a mess with at least some phoney bits. Pass. And go to a reputable seller for vintage, not some apparent ebay 'bargain'...

socalwatchcollector · 16 December 2013, 02:02 AM

junker....

kooltzar · 16 December 2013, 07:01 AM

Gentlemen,

It might not be the red sub of all our dreams, but it is certainly no junker. I don't see anything wrong with case, movement and dial. Dial even matches serial No. period. The crystal is just very polished, I for myself love such crystals, as the almost look like tropics (I personally hate the hat shaped crystals). Bezel I can't say, but it also looks authentic as does the insert which has a nice fade. The only thing apparently wrong is the clasp of the band (and maybe the whole band, but David can surely advise on that as the expert). The only thing that would scare me is the location of the seller and watch, but price so far seems to reflect that.

socalwatchcollector · 16 December 2013, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kooltzar

Gentlemen,

It might not be the red sub of all our dreams, but it is certainly no junker. I don't see anything wrong with case, movement and dial. Dial even matches serial No. period. The crystal is just very polished, I for myself love such crystals, as the almost look like tropics (I personally hate the hat shaped crystals). Bezel I can't say, but it also looks authentic as does the insert which has a nice fade. The only thing apparently wrong is the clasp of the band (and maybe the whole band, but David can surely advise on that as the expert). The only thing that would scare me is the location of the seller and watch, but price so far seems to reflect that.

One mans junk is another mans treasure... It certainly appears to be authentic or parts of it anyway which I should have clarified...

kooltzar · 16 December 2013, 08:46 AM

Maybe misunderstood you then, thought you think it's a complete fake or franken.

15 December 2013, 01:44 PM	#1
QueueCumber "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Q Location: The Q Continuum Watch: ST:TNG Posts: 8,466	What do all of you think of this red 1680? Hello experts, friends or both! What do you think of this red 1680: http://m.ebay.com/itm/360813154065?cmd=VIDESC Thanks!! __________________ Instagram: _queuecumber_

15 December 2013, 02:30 PM	#3
QueueCumber "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Q Location: The Q Continuum Watch: ST:TNG Posts: 8,466	Thanks! __________________ Instagram: _queuecumber_

15 December 2013, 04:31 PM	#4
007Sub "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Real Name: Greg Location: USA Watch: Milsub Posts: 1,635	Lugs are mangled. Look elsewhere. __________________ @true_patina @true.dome

15 December 2013, 09:09 PM	#5
bayerische "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Real Name: Andreas Location: Margaritaville Watch: Smurf Posts: 19,879	"Original" is surely up for debate... __________________ Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

15 December 2013, 02:09 PM	#2
Justso "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Real Name: Justin Location: Florida, USA Watch: Submariner 16800 Posts: 102	Stay away. Bracelet & crystal are aftermarket. A 9315 bracelet does not have a crown on the flip lock. Crystal is bad. Case back is problematic.

15 December 2013, 09:42 PM	#6
Vincent65 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Switzerland Posts: 14,298	No such thing as a "60's" feet first either… 3.7 would put one at around 1974, but that thing is a mess with at least some phoney bits. Pass. And go to a reputable seller for vintage, not some apparent ebay 'bargain'...

16 December 2013, 02:02 AM	#7
socalwatchcollector "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Real Name: John Location: newport beach Watch: Pateks Plural Posts: 1,620	junker....

16 December 2013, 07:01 AM	#8
kooltzar "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Zürich Watch: Submariner 5512 Posts: 922	Gentlemen, It might not be the red sub of all our dreams, but it is certainly no junker. I don't see anything wrong with case, movement and dial. Dial even matches serial No. period. The crystal is just very polished, I for myself love such crystals, as the almost look like tropics (I personally hate the hat shaped crystals). Bezel I can't say, but it also looks authentic as does the insert which has a nice fade. The only thing apparently wrong is the clasp of the band (and maybe the whole band, but David can surely advise on that as the expert). The only thing that would scare me is the location of the seller and watch, but price so far seems to reflect that.

16 December 2013, 08:46 AM	#10
kooltzar "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Zürich Watch: Submariner 5512 Posts: 922	Maybe misunderstood you then, thought you think it's a complete fake or franken.

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