Hey everyone - wanted to let you all know that I just put up a collector's resource website on all the iterations and particularities of the 1675 model. There are pages on the history, all major dial variations, and components. It's a free site and is there solely as a reference when assessing these beauties. I hope you enjoy it.

gmtmaster1675.com

Also, it's my first website so feedback is encouraged!

-- Andrew

 

Nice!!

 

Nice work my friend

Very useful, as I am a big fan of 1675 too

 

Excellent work! and will come in very handy for me as a 1675 is on my wish list

 

Very handy! Thanks!

 

Great work!

 

Very nice Andrew!
I was expecting something like for a long time.
But still something unclear whith the insert. I am still not able to distinguish red back and blue black fat font without looking a the back.
Here is one of my previous 1675, how can you say it is a red back or blue back?

 

Nicely done, Andrew! Site looks great. What did you use to photograph the watches?

 

@miacono001
I believe the technical metadata appears on the shots Andrew took himself, whereas all the other pics/illustrations are sourced (and credited) from the web via various collectors and sellers.

 

Great post Been looking at buying one so now I can educate myself.

 

Very nice!! Thanks a lot for sharing

 

Re the statement that "From 1959 to 1980, the 1675 was the only GMT model produced by Rolex," is the general consensus that the 1655 (which started in the early 1970's) was not a GMT model, despite the GMT hand and function? Or is your statement incorrect? Not being critical, but just asking.

 

Hey Fost - no straight forward answer as far as I know. Red back inserts should only have with the "squashed" 8 / 18 (like yours) and the blue backs usually come with the circular/more elongated 8 / 18 (amongst other changes between the fonts). IIRC, there are some transitional blue backs in the early 80's with the earlier red back type font. Hence my comment on the site to always look at the back. Given that you have a Mark 1 (with great dial condition!), red back would be period correct. In the end, why not just look at the back to make sure?

 

@miacono001 - @onthedial is correct - I amalgamated the data from a lot of discussion, research, buying/selling, etc. But I don't have a great camera set up, nor the background to take great photos, so I asked friends and people in the community who already had great photos to use as examples. Maybe one day I'll update with my own photos but not for a while.

 

@calalum - The 1655 hand doesn't rotate independently of the other hands and the bezel doesn't rotate so while you can tell the time on a 24 hour scale you can't track a second time zone. The 16550 (the next generation of Explorer II), which had the caliber 3085, had an independent 24 hour hand that would allow a second time zone to be tracked. But that came in 1985 (I think).

 

Thanks! I looked at the back! But I was wondering if there is another way... But Got my answer thanks!
It was a blue back btw

 

Sorry! Still looks like a great example

 

Very well done. Will be using this as reference when looking for my next piece!

 

I check and see the spacing of the 8 on 18 to see if is completely in the blue or partially in the red. I also look at the 6 and 8 to see how fat they are.

Look at enough bezels, and can tell pretty easily.

 

Kick ass website Andrew!