|
|
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
8 October 2009, 10:53 AM
|
#1 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Ivan
Location: Edmond, OK
Watch: 126600
Posts: 34
|
16750 GMT or is there something better?
For the last few months I've been going back and forth trying to decide which vintage Rolex model will be my next (and first vintage) purchase. At first I was leaning towards 5513 Sub, then while researching I came across a nice example of a matte dial Sea Dweller and now I believe that I've arrived at the 16750 GMT.
Currently I have an LV Sub and an Omega Seamaster. I'd like to add a Blancpain 50 fathoms also in the future but right now I was hoping to find a nice vintage model. I've always admired the Subs and originally looked at some of the transitional subs but I can't justify having a watch that looks so close to my LV which I wear with black insert. The 5513 really caught my eye with the matte dial and no date and ultimately the watch seemed too similar to what I already had. Next up was the matte dial SD which I talked myself into believing was different enough to justify. After a few weeks even the SD seemed to have lost its spot in my heart for being too similar to the LV. At some point I decided that I really wanted something different and the GMT might be able to finally fill that void. One of my earliest Rolex memories was of the Pepsi GMT on a jubilee that I saw on vacation back in the late eighties. After checking a few websites (http://doubleredseadweller.com/index.htm) I finally think I found something that could fit my needs, the 16750. According to doublered, that model began production in 1980 and ran until 1985 with the matte dial. One of the things I initially liked about this was that since I was born in 1982 assuming I could find a watch made in the same year, the watch would grow old with me and we'd always be the same age. I like that the 16750 has the acrylic crystal and matte dial which harkens back to the old days but the watch still has some of the more functional features that will make for a great daily wearer such as the second time zone, date and the 100 meter wr. I browsed the for sale forums here and it seemed the $3500 range would be about what I was looking at for that model. I checked ebay to see what they offered and I was pretty surprised to see something that was pretty close to what I was looking for: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tchlink:top:en Watch had box, papers and from what I could tell seemed to be in original condition (hands and band could be replacement, not 100% sure). Seller feedback was good and paypal accepted. Is there anything obvious that have missed or is there any tell tale signs to watch out for on these GMT's? I'd really appreciate any feedback on the pros and cons of this model of watch vs other GMT and other vintage Rolexes in general. Resale value is not that great of a concern with me since I plan on keeping it for quite awhile but would a previous model (1675) or a later model (16760) be vastly more desirable if I ever did have to sell? Also, what are peoples thoughts on the jubilee vs the oyster? Cost, durability, looks, etc. I was hoping to try the jubilee since it would be one additional factor that would differentiate the GMT from my current but right now it’s not a deal breaker for me. As stated above, I've spent time looking at the various vintage tool watches and seem to have a new flavor every few months so please don't hold back if you think I'm just being blinded by love. Also, does anyone know what serial number I should be looking for if I wanted an 1982 16750? Thanks to everyone in advance! Ivan |
|
|
|
8 October 2009, 01:04 PM
|
#2 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Hey Ivan,
You'll get no arguement from me about the 16750.  The first GMT to feature a fast beat 3xxx movement and quick-set date. I think the 16750 is the best of all worlds in that in an early matt dial version you get the matt/acryllic combination with the "upgraded" movement that the mothership will continue to support for the forseeable future.Indeed the example you show has replacement hands, but scouting for a matching set can be done. The matt SD might be the better "collectable" at the moment, but there are those that feel the 16750 is poised for a move upward as pricing is in the relam for most collectors. For an 82 version I would look in the 7 to 7.4ish mil. range. Good luck.  Mine, 
|
|
|
|
|
8 October 2009, 01:45 PM
|
#3 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Nikos
Location: Florida
Watch: Rolex GMT 16750
Posts: 8,418
|
The 16750 GMT is my favorite watch.I bought 1 new and have worn it almost every day since.Of all the watches I own its the only 1 I call my watch the others are watches I own
 I think its a very good choice
__________________
Follow Me On Instagram @nickgogas Original Owner ROLEX 16750 GMT Daily Wearer For Over 13,000 Days And Counting
|
|
|
|
|
8 October 2009, 03:48 PM
|
#4 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,830
|
Since you mention water resistance as a prerequisite, one thing to remember in whatever vintage watch you decide on, is to make sure its water resistance is checked annually if you intend to use it under water. There shouldn't be a problem as long as crystal, crown, tube, and gaskets are replaced as needed.
I like my 16750 very much, but kind of prefer the uncluttered dial of my 5513 (especially if I intended to use it as a daily wearer). Date and GMT function isn't much of an issue for me personally.
__________________
Cheers, Adam |
|
|
|
|
8 October 2009, 05:15 PM
|
#5 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 2,934
|
Err buddy Ivan...subject to all is safe n smooth...
this is coming Orchi's way... ONE of the BEST Ref 16750 GMT Master out there in the internet... No corrosion...Minor dings n scratches(as can be expected for 27 yo watch)... n it has...NEVER been Re-Polished yet.       ALWAYS do your study well n buy from reputable Sellers... Even IF you may need to pay a little more...QUALITY assurance is the bottom line... 
|
|
|
|
|
8 October 2009, 05:47 PM
|
#6 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USA
Watch: ing the time go by
Posts: 1,444
|
16750's
They take some beating
I just need to find a nice set of old hands for mine, anyone got? 
|
|
|
|
|
8 October 2009, 06:01 PM
|
#7 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USA
Watch: ing the time go by
Posts: 1,444
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 12:09 AM
|
#8 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 12:17 AM
|
#9 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Real Name: Mik
Location: USA
Posts: 13,724
|
Quote:
 Another choice added to my list!!!!!! Mike that is the cat's meow there! I have never seen such a pristine example with flawless patina across the face. It is so good I'd probable question it as fake if I saw you walking down the street!
__________________
member#3242 |
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 02:15 AM
|
#10 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 2,934
|
Quote:
It has almost everything as close to the time...when this 7.2mil series watch... rolled out of factory...by 1982 or so...with the exception of perhaps... its present bezel insert...or crown or its plastic crystal... It even has the long history of being worn by perhaps one owner... evidently with the minor scratches n dings found on the watch... without ever being Re-Polished...yet. Once or each time the watch is polished off... Orchi believes the watch would lose a part of that history...originally. That's is why these days...Orchi ONLY hunts down those vintage Rolex watches... that were NOT re-polished yet...still having every parts of its original history... INTACT... Many would say...with Patek which are unaffordable mostly... its about being able to pass on its long traditions to the next generations... BUT Orchi says...with Rolex which were often used as a tool watch... its about being able to pass on its history... originally.,..to the next generations...
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 09:57 AM
|
#11 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Ivan
Location: Edmond, OK
Watch: 126600
Posts: 34
|
Quote:
I'll keep my eyes peeled for the 7 to 7.4 range. Thanks for the info Fantastic watch Mike. How long have you owned it? Last edited by Ivan; 9 October 2009 at 10:06 AM.. Reason: spelling |
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 10:04 AM
|
#12 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Ivan
Location: Edmond, OK
Watch: 126600
Posts: 34
|
Quote:
Thanks for the advice and the mention of the 5513, I'll keep it on the short list for sure. Ivan |
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 10:10 AM
|
#13 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Quote:
As the matt SD, if a tripple 6 with the fast beat movement RSC shouldn't be a problem (just watch they don't change the dial/hands). If a 1665 I'd go with an Independent here in the states just to be sure. Several of our own here on the forum do fantastic work and are known and accepted by the community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 10:15 AM
|
#14 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Rick
Location: At what TIME?!!!
Watch: the SKY tonite!
Posts: 3,225
|
I agree with everyone else. Luv my 16750, with WG surrounds and no 'DATE' on the dial!
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 10:19 AM
|
#15 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Ivan
Location: Edmond, OK
Watch: 126600
Posts: 34
|
Quote:
You appear to be a very patient person Orchi and it looks like that was rewarded by the looks of that watch, its gorgous! If I understand you correctly, your plan is to leave the watch as untouched as possible, meaning no polishing. I admire your desire to preserve all that history, not too common these days. If you ever grow tired of that smokin 16750 be sure to look me up as that 7.2 falls right in the sweet spot. I've been trying to read up as much as possible on the GMTs, does anyone have any favorite reference sites that would be benefitial? Also, besides the sales forum here and TZ, what other places would be good sources for vintage watches? |
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 10:24 AM
|
#16 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Quote:
http://www.doubleredseadweller.com/gmt.htm and part II http://www.doubleredseadweller.com/gmt_transition.htm (yeah the 16750 is mine )
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 October 2009, 10:59 AM
|
#17 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 2,934
|
Quote:
Here are some postings from own experience n study... Ref 1675 GMT Master Matte Dial variants... http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=74976 Ref 16750 GMT Master Dial variants... http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=77719 Ref 16760 GMT Master II Dial variants...a.k.a "Fat Lady" http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=76416 Here's on the most elusive ALL RED 24hr GMT Hand for early Ref 1675 GMT Master... http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=75710 Hopes you would enjoy reading them... IF NOT...please feel free to point out any mistakes... there might be from those articles...
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 October 2009, 11:25 AM
|
#18 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Ivan
Location: Edmond, OK
Watch: 126600
Posts: 34
|
Quote:
Mike and Orchi - Thank you both for the links and great information. Once I end up finding that special one I'll be sure to post. Keep up the great work, many people are benefiting from your knowledge. |
|
|
|
|
|
17 October 2009, 03:34 PM
|
#19 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: sydney ,AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2
|
GMT Master VS GMT Master II???????
Hello fellow Rolex enthusiasts!! i'm new to the forum, i just wanted to
know if any one out there has a 1675 GMT Master and a 16750 or 16700 GMT Master? The thing is i want to buy one but i like the older Masters more than the Master II's due to a number of things, one of these being the weight i have a small wrist and own a 114270 explorer and gilt perpetual date i love the SUB but too heavy! GONE OFF THE TRACK!!!! basically can someone please tell me if the older (1675,16750,16700) are actually lighter than the Master II's (16760,16710 )????? regards Dean |
|
|
|
|
18 October 2009, 03:28 AM
|
#20 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 2,934
|
Quote:
Yes if weight is of your concern...Orchi would say BOTH the 1675 n 16750... are themselves...lighter...especially without the bracelet fitted to it... You could wear either one with a leather strap...n it's very comfortable n light... Notable difference is...the 1675 Date function is Non-Quickset... n the 16750 has the Quickset Date function...which should be more versatile...
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 October 2009, 05:48 AM
|
#21 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Ivan
Location: Edmond, OK
Watch: 126600
Posts: 34
|
Quote:
I was able to find a 16750 with original dial/hands and in good shape, it arrived a few days ago. Compared to the Sub (16610lv) it is much lighter and also not quite as tall. The soild end links of the newer Subs/Gmts add a little weight. Overall though, the 16750 has me quite pleased and it has a the added feature of telling time in a second time zone. One thing to keep in mind is that the 24hr hand is linked to the hour/min hand so the 24 hour hand basically shows military time and the bezel is used to calculate the time in a different time zone. With the GMT II, the 24 hr hand is independant and will show a different time zone without using the bezel to calculate. Actually, two things to keep in mind, if you are going to try to keep period correct parts on the watch (dial, hands, crystal) finding parts for the older watches are much more expensive and harder to come by than new models. All part of the fun when dealing with 15-40 year old watches. Ivan |
|
|
|
|
|
18 October 2009, 10:14 AM
|
#22 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Gary
Location: GMT-6
Watch: GMT
Posts: 3,350
|
Some wonderful eye candy in this thread.
__________________
Omega Seamaster 300M GMT Noire Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 8500 Benson 1937 Sterling Silver Hunter |
|
|
|
|
18 October 2009, 10:20 AM
|
#23 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: sydney ,AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2
|
Thanks for the feedback Orchi & Ivan! yeah for me i think the 16750
with the non-gilt dial is for me because its the blend of older master and newer dial (markers) less prone to decay than the tritium? althought the 1675 is asthetically proberably the most beautiful rolex sports model ever made. Is it true than the oyster case , movement, and bracelet on the 16750 and 16700 were made to different specifications (lighter) than on the latter 16710 master II??? i was told that the 16760 "FAT- LADY" was purposely made thicker and heavier like a SUB but didn't last too long in manufacturing only 5 years or so? |
|
|
|
|
19 October 2009, 12:36 AM
|
#24 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Real Name: Ian
Location: Ridgewood, NJ USA
Posts: 83
|
I love the look of a matte dial pepsi gmt. Absolutely awesome. The only thing that concerns me is that for daily use if I were to really damage the crystal, are they easily available? I actually love the look of the acrylic, but sapphire is nice for lack of worry.
|
|
|
|
|
22 October 2009, 09:34 AM
|
#25 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hk
Posts: 10
|
Hi everyone
Could any forum member confirm if the 16750 matte 7mil, came originally with a silver date or a white date wheel. Is the visual differences in spotting these very slight or very noticeable? |
|
|
|
|
22 October 2009, 01:13 PM
|
#26 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: LONG ISLAND, NY
Watch: 2007 DAY DATE 18KT
Posts: 1,378
|
Only thing better than a 16750 is having more than one! OR a gold model. i will never part with mine.
__________________
ROLEX DAY DATE 118238 (2007) ROLEX DAY DATE 18238 (1997) ROLEX GMT 16750 PEPSI (1987) ROLEX AIR KING 14000 (1991) ROLEX GMTIIC TT 116713LN (2008) |
|
|
|
|
7 December 2009, 01:40 AM
|
#27 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Milan
Posts: 6
|
Weight and size comparison: 1675 and 16750. Can you help?
Hi,
first post with a question that I'm sure it's a small leap for many of you, but a giant one for me. Apologies if the matter has been already discussed somewhere else before. Question: from what I've read the common view is that the cases of the 1675 and 16750 are identical, and their weight (excluding bracelets) the same. Somebody is suggesting though that the 1675 case is thinner and this watch is lighter than the 16750. Any suggestions? I am interested in purchasing one model or the other. Weight and thinness of the case are one of the elements although, honestly, not really the major ones. I have tried a 1675 and a 16750 in different places and occasions and honestly I cannot recall a major difference, although the 1675 seemed lighter. Thanks in advance for any contribution. Shelter |
|
|
|
|
7 December 2009, 03:35 AM
|
#28 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
|
Quote:
One collector has measured case size of the 1675 and 16750 and found the "thin" case 1675 to measure at 1.27cm while latter 1675s and the 16750 measure at 1.30cm. The thinner case seems to associated with earlier examples though when the change occured I'm not sure. Probably, as with all things Rolex, there was an overlap. It doesn't seem like much, but I swear one can feel the difference. My gilt dial 1675 is a thin case and at least to me it seems,...well thinner. It's interesting that while the 1675 was rated at 50M WR, the 16750 was rated at 100M (either case on the 1675). The dials are not interchangeable due to the difference in the dial feet and the hand stack is different. I'm a big fan of the 1675, but the quick-set date feature makes the 16750 easier if the watch might share a rotation and wind down. My experience has been both movements (15xx and 31xx) are real work horses and capable of excellent timekeeping. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 December 2009, 11:47 AM
|
#29 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Real Name: Dennis
Location: Bay Area - 925
Posts: 40,018
|
I love 16750 GMT's !!!
__________________
TRF Member #6699 (since September 2007) |
|
|
|
|
7 December 2009, 12:24 PM
|
#30 |
|
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: jP
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT-MASTER
Posts: 17,308
|
You can't go wrong with a 16750 matt dial - I wear one daily. Production ended around 1983 and due to its popularity, the dials have appeared on later vintage 16750's. Personally, I believe, as well as many others, that a 1985 serial number is too late for a matt dialed 16750.
__________________
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. |
|
|
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
Linear Mode
