Hi guys, I have come to learn from Internet browsing that the tudor ranger market is a battlefield, but have been asked about this example locally and was wondering what you thought in regards to authenticity and the potential value? It appears to be a 7995 as per this article https://www.tudorwatch.com/magazine/article/tudor-history-origins-1960-to-1969 And haven't been able to find out much else! Thanks, Ed
For what it's worth (and that is one grain of salt) – to my untrained and uninformed eye, it looks perfectly honest and in order. I don't know enough about these to say anything definitively. Except that you're right about the battlefield part, so it's good to be weary. And that seeing more photos certainly wouldn't hurt. @ChicagoFrog owned one at some point in the last 2 years, I remember the FS listing. ...and he seems like a guy who does his homework.
Thanks for the reply @trackpad. I got some more information over at TRF under a similar thread title, and some of the fellas had the same opinion. Now I'm just waiting for the seller to get back to me to decide if he wants to sell it.
@EdtheAussie The dial, dial text and case look authentic enough in the pics to move forward on a possible purchase. The handset is too blown out (lacks any form of detail) to comment on. If the seller's price is compelling I would make every effort to examine this watch in person, with a loupe. In other words, I can't dismiss this Ranger as an obvious fake by looking at the pics alone, and there are a lot of obvious fakes in circulation.
No problem. Curious what the seller will be asking, as while I have the feeling prices on these (and on vintage Tudor more broadly) have cooled a bit, ...the prices on 1016’s have not. I like this dial and, think you’re right to at least be interested!
Hey guys, To follow up, the seller has had the watch serviced and a new crystal added. I urged him to have nothing else done to the watch, which hopefully has happened. Some more information has surfaced over the time, including that the owner says that the serial is 445xxx which places the date at 1964ish however he also states that it was very hard to make out it could be 545xxx which would place the watch in 1966/67ish. Also that the reference is 7965, however that again is close to 7995. But I have found one reference stating that 7965 and 7995 rangers were all but the same except for a different crown. I am still to see the watch in person, but am considering the purchase There is further discussion over of TRF if anyone is interested!
Unfortunately I can be of no assistance with authenticity. But I did want to say that it's a very nice looking Ranger. GL I hope it works out for you.
This looks like a good example. I’d love to have dibs on it if you decide against it or would be willing to part with it once you get it (especially if you find 34mm a bit small on the wrist). Here another for comparison
very neat, theres something floating in the bay atm thats very close. dont know enough of these to quote on price however. curious to see opinions
Need to be super careful with the Ranger as its one of the watches with the most fakes vs. legit examples out there. There are only a few sources for reference points on the web and the fakers get pretty close.
The watch on eBay looks shady and hands look incorrect. Also I thought 9050 rangers had a shield dial? Here is a further photo from the seller I have been in contact with. He states that there is no 'stainless steel' on either end of the lug, but is unable to get a clear photo to show. I'm thinking it may have been worn down and is just hard to see without a loupe. Hopefully we can come to agreement on a price and I can see the watch in person soon to make a final decision/inspection. Ps. I'm like 99% sure on the purchase, but with all the variations and unknows with rangers, authenticity is hard to confirm.
The one on the Bay is fake. Ed - get this watch already ; ) . Like I said a couple months ago - I got first dibs should you choose not to chase it ; )