ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

jms_w · 2 April 2009, 11:36 AM

Took some pics of the new watch. I think there's something wrong here. Except for the "10", the numbers on the bezel insert seem to be to close to the outer edge. Shouldn't they be exactly equi-distant from both inner and outer edges and very close? The bracelet seems to be lighter than on my Omega which I bought from an AD. I thought maybe it had to do with the hollow PCL's? Am I in trouble here?

jms_w · 3 April 2009, 02:06 AM

For those with discerning eyes, can you tell me if this is fake or not? Compare with these reliable (I think) notes:

http://www.djbwatches.com/blog/rolex...r-counterfeit/

Thanks,
James

idk01 · 3 April 2009, 02:27 AM

Hi James,

Do you have a serial for the watch, usually have to take the band off the 6 o'clock side of the watch.

Did you get paperwork and all the rest of the box and items?

Cheers,

Dave.

springer · 3 April 2009, 02:29 AM

The band appears genuine, it has the proper tapered links, unlike the counterfeits. The clasp looks correct also based on the numbers, stampings and scrollwork. It has the correct hologram sticker on the case and the dial appears genuine. I see your concern on the bezel insert, it could be an aftermarket replacement or genuine, can't be 100% sure based on the photos as the aftermarket bezel inserts are very,very good. The white pearl insert though, appears to be genuine, unlike the aftermarket pearls. Usually the aftermarket inserts do not have the proper shape on the underneath side and often will bind with the flat spring that fits under the bezel. When this occurs, the bezel doesn't ratchet properly - kind of binds while being turned.

JJ Irani · 3 April 2009, 02:29 AM

Seems okay to me, James!!

idk01 · 3 April 2009, 02:38 AM

Got to agree with Both Springer and JJ, the watch looks A-OK.

Can you give us a bit of background on her? where purchased? the production year (serial will tell us that)

I'm a little mixed on the bezel insert too.

jms_w · 3 April 2009, 02:40 AM

I did but it's a non-AD so I did not get Rolex papers. This is supposedly a D serial. The band was removed and the numbers match the papers I was given but they were not cleanly inscribed. The "S" in "STEEL" was not the same size as the other "S"'s. The SEL also had poor quality inscriptions and the band was very light. The bezel insert is what really throws me. The numbers should be equidistant from the edges and consistent all the way around. The height of the lume dot at 12 o'clock should extend past the height of the ring but it does not. If you look at the triangle lume at 12 o'clock, it does not meet the standards in the article. I just don't feel comfortable at all. The tick marks on the bezel should reach closer to the edges than it does. Again, it's the bezel that throws me the most. Am I being too anal? And how does the band weigh compared to a full SS band?

JJ Irani · 3 April 2009, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jms_w

I did but it's a non-AD so I did not get Rolex papers. The band was removed and the numbers match the papers I was given but they were not clean. The "S" in "STEEL" was not the same size as the other "S"'s. The SEL also had poor quality inscriptions and the band was very light. The bezel insert is what really throws me. The numbers should be equidistant from the edges and consistent all the way around. The height of the lume dot at 12 o'clock should extend past the height of the ring but it does not.

Best thing to do is take it into an AD and have the watch authenticated for complete and total peace of mind.

Good luck - JJ

idk01 · 3 April 2009, 02:45 AM

Just beat me to that one JJ ;-)

JJ Irani · 3 April 2009, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by idk01

Just beat me to that one JJ ;-)

No wonder they call me: "Quick Draw McGraw"!!

jms_w · 3 April 2009, 02:50 AM

The insert looks totally wrong compared to this...

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...hlight=16613+z

Let me know what you think.

JJ Irani · 3 April 2009, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jms_w

The insert looks totally wrong compared to this...

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...hlight=16613+z

Let me know what you think.

Can only see a red cross in that pic; but see if this one helps.

idk01 · 3 April 2009, 02:59 AM

Have a look at this one as well there's a bluesy fakeroo and it shows the serial on a black TT too just for comparison: warning this site is a fakeroo site :-)

http://www.watchmaker9.tv/products/r...iner_16613.htm

mattyb65 · 3 April 2009, 03:36 AM

I believe the bezel insert is fake. The pearl is too flat and the markings are all over the place. The "4" in 40 is wrong.

As for the rest of the watch? I'm not sure. The band looks good...not sure about the clasp. The dial color looks good, but the font is iffy. The first "s" in submariner is not shaped like it normally is.

Ultimately, we will need more pictures before I'm willing to make a conclusion.

If you could...please take a picture of the date as the 26th...a picture of the other side of the clasp...and between the lugs.

lbcgav · 3 April 2009, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattyb65

I believe the bezel insert is fake. The pearl is too flat and the markings are all over the place. The "4" in 40 is wrong.

As for the rest of the watch? I'm not sure. The band looks good...not sure about the clasp. The dial color looks good, but the font is iffy. The first "s" in submariner is not shaped like it normally is.

Ultimately, we will need more pictures before I'm willing to make a conclusion.

If you could...please take a picture of the date as the 26th...a picture of the other side of the clasp...and between the lugs.

It looks like an Isuzu S. Not rounded enough.

Isuzu_logo.jpg

JJ Irani · 3 April 2009, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lbcgav

It looks like an Isuzu S. Not rounded enough.

Attachment 61902

That's not a problem at all.....just different printers.

I have the same FLAT "S" on my steel Sub.

JJ

lbcgav · 3 April 2009, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

That's not a problem at all.....just different printers.

I have the same FLAT "S" on my steel Sub.

JJ

That's good to know.

mattyb65 · 3 April 2009, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

That's not a problem at all.....just different printers.

I have the same FLAT "S" on my steel Sub.

JJ

Cool. I thought I had seen it somewhere...

Then this watch is probably authentic...with the exception of that insert.

jms_w · 3 April 2009, 05:58 AM

UPDATE!!

So I was able to get a certified Rolex repair specialist to take a look at it. He also let me observe. The movement is an absolutely genuine 3135. The inscriptions of the model and serial number at 6 and 12 o'clock are correct. The band and serial were correct as well as the expanding clasp. He pulled out the crown, like out of the watch, and it was genuine. The screws for the SEL's were genuine. The dial and crystal were genuine. I even saw the etched crown and it looked genuine. The gasket was a little big and would've let water in so I got him to replace that. The insert is definitely aftermarket, the gold was a little too orange. If he had one in stock, I probably would've replaced it but I think I'll let it get scratched up a bit before I do that. The back cover was genuine but he noticed that it had been polished before putting the holographic sticker on, which he says is a fake. So, all in all, the watch is real except for the sticker and the insert is not perfect but not easily identified w/o close inspection. Even the Rolex guy at the AD couldn't tell if it was fake.

So, would I recommend swiss-wrist (aka swiss-wrist.com or swiss wrist), I would say yes but proceed with caution. I can only guess that the insert was replaced b/c it had scratches on it and the holographic sticker b/c it was worn or just not there. It probably would've been better to have left it off. The watch was advertised an unworn and I can attest that that is true. I adjusted the band myself and noticed that I introduced slight marks around the screw holes. They were not there before. In the end I have a genuine watch and it'll be that much better when I replace the insert. I will probably do it in a few weeks. I wonder if the anchor that I got is real...

Also, if anyone needs a Rolex repair specialist to take authenticate their watch within minutes instead of weeks as the 2 AD's in the area had specialists off-site, the place is called GC LA Precision and it's in Vienna, VA. The guy's name is Guido and his e-mail is alaverolex@aol.com. Tell him James W. with the 16613 sent you. He is a very nice guy and has over 30 years of experience.

James

CharlieG · 3 April 2009, 06:14 AM

Glad it worked out for you

jms_w · 3 April 2009, 06:28 AM

Thanks, everyone, for you help. The bezel was making me doubt the entire watch but it's what inside that counts the most to me.

jms_w · 3 April 2009, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattyb65

I believe the bezel insert is fake. The pearl is too flat and the markings are all over the place. The "4" in 40 is wrong.

As for the rest of the watch? I'm not sure. The band looks good...not sure about the clasp. The dial color looks good, but the font is iffy. The first "s" in submariner is not shaped like it normally is.

Ultimately, we will need more pictures before I'm willing to make a conclusion.

If you could...please take a picture of the date as the 26th...a picture of the other side of the clasp...and between the lugs.

I agree with you about the pearl. The position of the numbers bothered me. If I remember, I will take post pics of the stuff that you recommend but it'll hopefully be a moot point. Thanks for your observations.

3 April 2009, 02:27 AM	#3
idk01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Dave Location: Australia Watch: DJ16233TT Posts: 18,485	Hi James, Do you have a serial for the watch, usually have to take the band off the 6 o'clock side of the watch. Did you get paperwork and all the rest of the box and items? Cheers, Dave. __________________ *Apprentice to Terry Newton; Superstar and Fake Sleuth*

3 April 2009, 02:29 AM	#4
springer 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: jP Location: Texas Watch: GMT-MASTER Posts: 17,309	The band appears genuine, it has the proper tapered links, unlike the counterfeits. The clasp looks correct also based on the numbers, stampings and scrollwork. It has the correct hologram sticker on the case and the dial appears genuine. I see your concern on the bezel insert, it could be an aftermarket replacement or genuine, can't be 100% sure based on the photos as the aftermarket bezel inserts are very,very good. The white pearl insert though, appears to be genuine, unlike the aftermarket pearls. Usually the aftermarket inserts do not have the proper shape on the underneath side and often will bind with the flat spring that fits under the bezel. When this occurs, the bezel doesn't ratchet properly - kind of binds while being turned. __________________ Member of NAWCC since 1990. INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics.

3 April 2009, 02:29 AM	#5
JJ Irani Fondly Remembered Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: JJ Location: Auckland, NZ Watch: ALL SOLD!! Posts: 74,319	Seems okay to me, James!! __________________ Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!! I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!!

3 April 2009, 02:38 AM	#6
idk01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Dave Location: Australia Watch: DJ16233TT Posts: 18,485	Got to agree with Both Springer and JJ, the watch looks A-OK. Can you give us a bit of background on her? where purchased? the production year (serial will tell us that) I'm a little mixed on the bezel insert too. __________________ *Apprentice to Terry Newton; Superstar and Fake Sleuth*

3 April 2009, 02:45 AM	#9
idk01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Dave Location: Australia Watch: DJ16233TT Posts: 18,485	Just beat me to that one JJ ;-) __________________ *Apprentice to Terry Newton; Superstar and Fake Sleuth*

3 April 2009, 02:06 AM	#2
jms_w "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: East Coast Watch: 116710LN Posts: 557	For those with discerning eyes, can you tell me if this is fake or not? Compare with these reliable (I think) notes: http://www.djbwatches.com/blog/rolex...r-counterfeit/ Thanks, James

3 April 2009, 02:40 AM	#7
jms_w "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: East Coast Watch: 116710LN Posts: 557	I did but it's a non-AD so I did not get Rolex papers. This is supposedly a D serial. The band was removed and the numbers match the papers I was given but they were not cleanly inscribed. The "S" in "STEEL" was not the same size as the other "S"'s. The SEL also had poor quality inscriptions and the band was very light. The bezel insert is what really throws me. The numbers should be equidistant from the edges and consistent all the way around. The height of the lume dot at 12 o'clock should extend past the height of the ring but it does not. If you look at the triangle lume at 12 o'clock, it does not meet the standards in the article. I just don't feel comfortable at all. The tick marks on the bezel should reach closer to the edges than it does. Again, it's the bezel that throws me the most. Am I being too anal? And how does the band weigh compared to a full SS band?

3 April 2009, 02:50 AM	#11
jms_w "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: East Coast Watch: 116710LN Posts: 557	The insert looks totally wrong compared to this... http://www.rolexforums.com/showthrea...hlight=16613+z Let me know what you think.

3 April 2009, 02:59 AM	#13
idk01 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Dave Location: Australia Watch: DJ16233TT Posts: 18,485	Have a look at this one as well there's a bluesy fakeroo and it shows the serial on a black TT too just for comparison: warning this site is a fakeroo site :-) http://www.watchmaker9.tv/products/r...iner_16613.htm __________________ *Apprentice to Terry Newton; Superstar and Fake Sleuth*

3 April 2009, 03:36 AM	#14
mattyb65 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: Matt Location: Boston Watch: Rolex Sub-C Posts: 130	I believe the bezel insert is fake. The pearl is too flat and the markings are all over the place. The "4" in 40 is wrong. As for the rest of the watch? I'm not sure. The band looks good...not sure about the clasp. The dial color looks good, but the font is iffy. The first "s" in submariner is not shaped like it normally is. Ultimately, we will need more pictures before I'm willing to make a conclusion. If you could...please take a picture of the date as the 26th...a picture of the other side of the clasp...and between the lugs.

3 April 2009, 05:58 AM	#19
jms_w "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: East Coast Watch: 116710LN Posts: 557	UPDATE!! So I was able to get a certified Rolex repair specialist to take a look at it. He also let me observe. The movement is an absolutely genuine 3135. The inscriptions of the model and serial number at 6 and 12 o'clock are correct. The band and serial were correct as well as the expanding clasp. He pulled out the crown, like out of the watch, and it was genuine. The screws for the SEL's were genuine. The dial and crystal were genuine. I even saw the etched crown and it looked genuine. The gasket was a little big and would've let water in so I got him to replace that. The insert is definitely aftermarket, the gold was a little too orange. If he had one in stock, I probably would've replaced it but I think I'll let it get scratched up a bit before I do that. The back cover was genuine but he noticed that it had been polished before putting the holographic sticker on, which he says is a fake. So, all in all, the watch is real except for the sticker and the insert is not perfect but not easily identified w/o close inspection. Even the Rolex guy at the AD couldn't tell if it was fake. So, would I recommend swiss-wrist (aka swiss-wrist.com or swiss wrist), I would say yes but proceed with caution. I can only guess that the insert was replaced b/c it had scratches on it and the holographic sticker b/c it was worn or just not there. It probably would've been better to have left it off. The watch was advertised an unworn and I can attest that that is true. I adjusted the band myself and noticed that I introduced slight marks around the screw holes. They were not there before. In the end I have a genuine watch and it'll be that much better when I replace the insert. I will probably do it in a few weeks. I wonder if the anchor that I got is real... Also, if anyone needs a Rolex repair specialist to take authenticate their watch within minutes instead of weeks as the 2 AD's in the area had specialists off-site, the place is called GC LA Precision and it's in Vienna, VA. The guy's name is Guido and his e-mail is alaverolex@aol.com. Tell him James W. with the 16613 sent you. He is a very nice guy and has over 30 years of experience. James

3 April 2009, 06:14 AM	#20
CharlieG "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Charlie Location: NY Posts: 1,135	Glad it worked out for you

3 April 2009, 06:28 AM	#21
jms_w "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: East Coast Watch: 116710LN Posts: 557	Thanks, everyone, for you help. The bezel was making me doubt the entire watch but it's what inside that counts the most to me.

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