16800 condition

[WalterW]

Hey guys just picked up this 16800 with a sweet sweet custard patina. Really loving the shade of yellow on it even though I was never a big fan of heavy patina before. So the seller wouldn’t confirm or deny if the case had been recut or polished in the past. Didn’t really matter to me because I fell in love with the dial so I didn’t really care. But out of general curiosity do you all think the case was redone at some point in the past since 1982.











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PVR]

If you told me it was refinished I would believe it and if you told me it was unpolished I would believe it. When they look good enough to me that I can't tell, I don't care.

That watch is fantastic. Case and dial are a 10, hands not as nice but its an honest original watch. Nice pick up.

[Kingface66]

Great dial! But the corrosion on the hands would drive me nuts. I wouldn’t be able to unsee it. I guess it all comes down to how much you can ignore/live with when it comes to blemishes and damage

[WalterW]

At first the hand corrosion irked me slightly but now I kinda like it . It’s somewhat charming. And I’m assuming it would be really difficult to have that shade of yellow color matched to the hands

[Dan S]

I really like it ... aside from the cyclops and date window. ;-)

[Kingface66]

I can totally understand about finding flaws charming. And while I’m not trying to dissuade you, the hands stand out to me because nothing else on the watch shares that type of corrosion or damage, so they seem out of place.

Ok, it does sound like I’m trying to talk you out of it! I’m sorry! I’ve just learned (often the hard way) over the years that when I try to “live with” or talk myself into a purchase by justifying the flaws of the watch, the watches never stick around that long, and when I’ve resold them, guess what prospective buyers immediately point out and want a price reduction for? So, just be prepared!

And, seriously, it’s a beautiful watch in every other way.

[karleone]

Your case is very sharp. It has probably been polished but it has been very well done (V brushing on lugs, chamfers/ bevels still there, sharp case and crown guards). Patina is nice too. I would ne brothered by hands condition but it’s very personal. Congrats!!

[MrChamfers]

The 5 o clock lug looks a bit thin, so it looks polished but nicely recut to me.
The dial looks great, I'd just get some hands to match unless those can be refinished...can they?

[swish77]

Case appears unpolished. Also, angles on photos can be misleading. I don't see anything wrong with the lower right lug. Also, keep in mind that the crown-side lugs are always a little thinner on vintage sports Rolexes.

My eyes always go to the crown guards first, and they look untouched on this watch. Super fat and with that great angled ridge line, which is often the first thing that gets lost on a polished watch. Plus the lug holes look completely flat and the chamfers look period correct. Well-known case restorers, such as LAWW, do good work, but I find they never get those chamfers exactly factory correct. They're often a little overdone. I don't see that on this watch. Just one man's opinion.

[PVR]

Once again, you have a watch that can fool experts. Some of us think its been polished and recut, and others think its unpolished.

I must disagree with MrChamfers as I do not see the 5 lug looking polished or thin at all, it is consistent with the other 3. In addition, if you think it was recut then point me to the guy who was able to perfectly match not only the width of the chamfer but the exact angle of the chamfer to the other 3 lugs. I say no way.

Either the whole watch was recut at one time or its never been polished. I like to look at the lug holes and scuffs and scratches on sides of case to help make that determination, but LAWW has been doing "vintage lapping" for years where they leave the sides alone and only refinish the top of the lugs and chamfer cut.

I cannot give a definitive answer on this case but, I can definitively say I would buy it in a second because it looks perfectly good to me regardless.

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by PVR

Once again, you have a watch that can fool experts. Some of us think its been polished and recut, and others think its unpolished.

I must disagree with MrChamfers as I do not see the 5 lug looking polished or thin at all, it is consistent with the other 3. In addition, if you think it was recut then point me to the guy who was able to perfectly match not only the width of the chamfer but the exact angle of the chamfer to the other 3 lugs. I say no way.

Either the whole watch was recut at one time or its never been polished. I like to look at the lug holes and scuffs and scratches on sides of case to help make that determination, but LAWW has been doing "vintage lapping" for years where they leave the sides alone and only refinish the top of the lugs and chamfer cut.

I cannot give a definitive answer on this case but, I can definitively say I would buy it in a second because it looks perfectly good to me regardless.

I certainly couldn't prove it without seeing the watch in person, but that lug does seem thin to me... maybe it was made that way.

If you compare it to this unpolished example from Jacek, the OP lug is about 10% less wide at the lug hole (caliper test).
Also you can see the end of the pin just at the edge of the lug hole there. YMMV

edit: I was thinking that a watch with an unpolished case with hardly any wear would also have pristine hands and dial, as in a safe queen.

[TimeToGo]

.
Looks like a great watch - nice thick case!
Wear in the best of health!

[swaini3]

I like it.... Nice purchase. Enjoy it

[btinl]

I have an unpolished 16800 from 1982 that I purchased from the original owner. The chamfers look the same as yours. Looks great!

[JustinK]

Very nice watch! It does not appear recut to me based on the crown guards and the lug holes. The lug tops could have been brushed. Either way its a very nice example.

I think the hands look great, I am a fan of the corrosion that is common on the transitional models. I have a 16800 where the exact opposite has happened with the hands as only the second hand has corroded.

That's a keeper, Congrats!

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by swaini3

I like it.... Nice purchase. Enjoy it

For sure!

[zapokee]

Gut reaction: Detailed some time ago (really don't like the term "recut") and then worn well, producing natural wear on the newer chamfered surfaces.

You could probably contact LAWW/Rolliworks and ask if they've ever worked on that serial number.

Either way, enjoy that baby!

[bondtoys]

I don‘t trust those uniformly patinated dials with the pumpkin hue.
Imo all of them have been in Hong Kong at one point.
We‘ve had a (now banned) member from there who apparently had a neverending supply of those pumpkin dialed vintage watches that had never appeared like that before.

[jl4ec]

condition is not bed

[watchmainspring]

I strongly believe it's recut. The polished look on the chamfers makes that suggestion. Looks great through.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Swearengen]

Its a fine looking case. Has it been recut? I don't know but if it was its been done very well. Hands on Matt 16800's often show signed of corrosion. However I am unsure why what apparently seem to be a safe queen would have such advanced corrosion. My own 16800 shows slight signs of corrosion, and I always thought by virtue of the lighter lumes its been out and about for most of its life, while the OP's darker lumes might be indicative of long term storage.

[Tom1675]

I don't think its been recut. As I understand it you get that kind of patina from a safe queen piece which would jive with the case. The hands, as observed are a bit of a riddle but frankly don't bother me...

[MrChamfers]

I wonder why the seller won't say if it is unpolished.
I mean if it were an unpolished safe queen the asking price would be much higher than for a recut/welded piece.

[hutch300]

I lean towards recut myself but in no way would be sure. Doesn't matter - case looks good and I like the dial and hands. Lots of these have hands like that and I think its charming. Its yours now - enjoy it :)

[springer]

Originally Posted by MrChamfers

I wonder why the seller won't say if it is unpolished.
I mean if it were an unpolished safe queen the asking price would be much higher than for a recut/welded piece.

How would one identify a welded piece? I would like to know please - as well as many others here and elsewhere.

Also, I'm lost on this "recut" verbiage being thrown around lately. I might be assuming too much, but what does all these 'recut" comments refer to?

Personally, for me, a nice, professionally refinished case is what any collector would expect and covet on a vintage watch - especially if it needed some attention. If this is what "recut" is referring to, then what is wrong with calling it what it is...a properly refinished case?

I've seen some pretty "ratty" unpolished watches being offered for sale lately and they aren't getting much action except for reductions in price. My observations have been - an unpolished watch is only desirable to most collectors if it is in decent condition. And, as anyone that has been collecting for a while knows, there are a very finite number of watches out there in Vintage Land.

I've met very, very few collectors in my 50 years of collecting that covet the old, ratty vintage watch just because someone calls it unpolished.

jP

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by springer

How would one identify a welded piece? I would like to know please - as well as many others here and elsewhere.

Also, I'm lost on this "recut" verbiage being thrown around lately. I might be assuming too much, but what does all these 'recut" comments refer to?

Personally, for me, a nice, professionally refinished case is what any collector would expect and covet on a vintage watch - especially if it needed some attention. If this is what "recut" is referring to, then what is wrong with calling it what it is...a properly refinished case?

I've seen some pretty "ratty" unpolished watches being offered for sale lately and they aren't getting much action except for reductions in price. My observations have been - an unpolished watch is only desirable to most collectors if it is in decent condition. And, as anyone that has been collecting for a while knows, there are a very finite number of watches out there in Vintage Land.

I've met very, very few collectors in my 50 years of collecting that covet the old, ratty vintage watch just because someone calls it unpolished.

jP

Springer brings up a great point: are unpolished, but ratty and worn-out cases “better” than a professionally, and lovingly polished case? Why? Why is an unpolished, but trashed watch more attractive and sought after than one that looks fantastic after a visit to one of our esteemed vintage watch restorers, like Rolliworks or LA Watchworks? Who made that pronouncement, and why do we follow it? And why do so many of us blindly accept it and casually throw out phrases like “recut” without being able to explain why it’s such a travesty?

[Jackie Daytona]

Beautiful looking 16800!

[MrChamfers]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

Springer brings up a great point: are unpolished, but ratty and worn-out cases “better” than a professionally, and lovingly polished case? Why? Why is an unpolished, but trashed watch more attractive and sought after than one that looks fantastic after a visit to one of our esteemed vintage watch restorers, like Rolliworks or LA Watchworks? Who made that pronouncement, and why do we follow it? And why do so many of us blindly accept it and casually throw out phrases like “recut” without being able to explain why it’s such a travesty?

I think an unpolished and ratty case is pretty undesirable for most. Now a good condition case that is unpolished, people seem to like that very much. Right?
The problem with some good condition cases is they have been laser welded and had the chamfers redone, and they are sold at a premium as unpolished.
The only way to tell would be xray or some chemical test from what I've read.
But you don't hear of too many people going that far to check. It is easier to accept a nice case for what it is, and if had been built up and restored in the past, so be it.

[PVR]

I have been hearing about this chemical and x ray testing of cases to see if they have been laser welded for years and never seen a single bit of evidence that either can be done.

What can be done is to loop the case or check under a microscope for porosity, especially on the lugs, to see if its been built up. You see an original case is cast from a block of steel (or gold) but laser welding is done in spots which introduces oxygen into the metal. Oxygen produces bubbles and when you clean the weld you end up with microscopic pin hole dots caused by the air bubbles. Polishing it can help cover it and the really good guys laser weld, lap, lightly polish THEN go back and hit the porosity again with the laser and then do the process all over again until the porosity is gone.

Not many people are going to put the time in to do it right but, for the big boy watches like gold 6542's or Paul Newmans, that case job can cost thousands to get right, but in the end its worth every penny to restore a weak case back to factory or even better than factory.

The job of a dealer is to decide when to make the call to recut a case (or refinish a case for Springer) or leave it alone. For the vast majority of cases its an easy call, but for some right on the cusp between unpolished and ratty, its not always easy.

The term "Recut" irefers to the chamfers being recut into the case. The word refinished or refurbished to me always has a negative connotation which borders on something negative like a refurbished iPhone or refinished dial. I don't like the term so I personally like restored or recut to describe any case that has been worked on.

[datejust24]

The patina perfectly aligns with the 98% of the other examples of matte 16800’s I’ve seen and that case is superb…congrats on acquiring such a stunning example