Hi all,
I was trying to find some info about this watch online, but could not find the same dial (color combination).Thus, I have some concerns about this watch.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated!

 

Like no Rolex I have ever seen, let alone never even having seen a picture of one like it. Not sayin' it's a fake, but I (for one) would need to see a lot more before I offered an opinion. "California" dials similar to this one abound in the world of vintage Rolex. Can you upload pictures of the back of the watch case, inside the case back, and the movement? Serial numbers and case style numbers would aid in determining a pedigree, if indeed there is one. For the present, colour me very suspicious!

 

Unfortunately, this is the best picture from the seller, no caseback, neither pictures of the movement. All I have found was a California dials, but the color....Also he has mentioned that bracelet is not an original. Also, cyclop on the California... looks like the inner line is following the circle on the dial, this one doesn't.

 

Looks like a bitsa.

Hands/dial I'd say are redial/non Rolex respectively.

Walk/run away.

 

OK, thanks guys . I figured that something is wrong with it, just wanted to double check with Rolex PROs.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

Pretty obvious it's not right - in addition to other things stated the Cyclops magnification is off, which is a common tell for a fake crystal at least. This one I suspect it's much more than the crystal that is fake...

 

At best this is a standard Tudor Oyster that has had an aftermarket dial and hands added. I say at best as while there were a handful of dual badged they were from the 30s or something - I have never seen one in real life.

The quality of the photos make it tough to think the case / movement are even legit. Best to stay well away.

 

With all the info I have, I'll send an email to the seller and will check what he has to say about it!Thanks for an input gentlemen.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

He actually said that watch is from 50s

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

The Rolex with the Tudor was from before Tudor was a brand in the 40s. If i it from the 40s or 50s the serial and ref will be stamped on he caseback. Between the lugs on this model is roughly beginning of 60s

 

Many warning signs. And, IMO, also not a great design. Steer clear!

 

Over 40 years of collecting, I have seen just one legitimate Rolex marked watch with the model name Tudor on the dial. By the 1950s, the Tudor had become the little brother line, marketed beside Rolex as a lower priced line. If this just happened to be a legitimate Rolex dial marked Tudor as well, it would not be from the 1950s! The badly worn numbers on the case back aren't a lot of help. The model number (01090) doesn't appear in my reference material, and if the number 7809 1 is actually a serial number, that number would appear to be from circa 1936-37. That is, if it IS a Rolex serial number. IMO, that is NOT an Oyster crown on that watch. Still need to see what is inside the case.

 

And the crown on the OP's watch is likely fake.

The caseback is not from the OPs watch but an early 50s (1952?) watch I had. 7809 was the model, serial was 6x,xxx range - numbers are upside down in that photo

And you are correct on the rest of your statement