Urgent Help with GMT 1675

Thanks for the pics @t_swiss_t . I agree with your assessment of the case and bezel. It's clearly evident the original chamfer lines and traces of original satin finish on the lugs and crown guards are still present. Dents and dings from wear over time are also present and not the type of manufactured/superficial wear we see on many recut cases. I don't believe the head or bezel have ever seen a polishing wheel and appear to be in very good original condition. Most collectors would be very pleased with this condition.

I would be pleased with this condition for that price, too; but I’m having a hard time believing that chrome-all-over appearance is from “sleeve polishing”

the one picture above (the first) that appears to show some lug definition, is also with blinding reflection and possibly a convenient/lucky angle

not saying any of this to disagree, but instead to express surprise that this chrome-plated looking case is seen by some to have not been polished!

It is almost a nos 1675 ...

@cvalue13 My opinion comes from experience in owning and holding honest examples in person. If this were polished by a wheel, the chamfers and satin finish would not be retained as indicated in these pics. The lug holes show wear but no evidence of polishing and appear factory original for a matte era case.

Come on that is not a satin finish. We want also to say that this watch has been well polished? That is a coarse polishing which unfortunately we find in many rolex watches and not only.

I disagree with your assessment on all points. This watch has the appearance of "sleeve polishing" . You can learn more about that in the link provided earlier in the thread by @t_swiss_t , which technically is a smoothing or softening of original finish, but vastly different from a watchmaker using a polishing wheel which changes the original chamfer lines, dimensions and replaces the original satin finish. This piece does not display signs of having been polished in that mechanical manner and would be described by most knowledgeable collectors and dealers as appearing unpolished, retaining signs of original finish with wear from use over time.

Could someone have taken a jewelers cloth to it? Sure, we’ll never know. But coarse polishing it is not. With comments like that, you either have standards that discount many good examples (which is fine), or just don’t know enough about these watches to make an informed opinion (which is also fine, but you might need to read and see more in the metal before making more comments).

If you are serious on what you say, I am seriously worried about what passes here as a competent opinion.

Maybe you have never seen how a good case looks like so I try to post you a couple of good example in order that you can compare the one of the topic with those I consider in good shape.

The first four pictures are about a new old stock 1675 I have recently seen which gives you the idea of how the lugs and the bezel should look like. I did not posted the crown guards because it is a "cornini" since it is an earlier serial. On laser refinished cases they try to go close to this, but it is impossible to reach a good standard because very often (like in this case) you need to add too much material. Serious and trustable watchmaker aware their customers before doing any job on the case. Imho is better to keep it like it is, original, genuine and if it is not super nice that is it. But this is a personal opinion.

Picture number 5 and 6 are two different 1675 both with a well polished case and you can easly see the differences; first from the lugs and then also from the crown guards which are like they should be and not missing important part of the original shape.

The last watch, the one in picture number 6, has been sold last year by the original owner for 18k euro. One of the most beautiful 1675 I have ever seen.

Of course I will keep studying. Always open to learn and share opinions. I will be also happy to read your topic/article, but you cannot tell to people that are reading this topic this case has been well polished.

@Fedoclock May I suggest you take the advice provided earlier. You are engaging with collectors who own and/or have handled such pieces in person and are not just commenting from looking at photos as their source of knowledge. Among the flaws with your position is an attempt to compare anything NOS to a piece that has been worn regularly for decades and comparing examples from different eras (gilt and matte). Might I suggest you visit some sites that provide details on variants such as the 1675 in question and cover differences in how they were manufactured over time.

Yes, if you compare everything to NOS or mint examples, everything else looks bad. >99% of vintage 1675s are not in that kind of shape, but the majority of collectors think they are still worth collecting. Quite alright if you think it is terribly polished but I'm writing this to say that this opinion is not the majority opinion, and many would think the case quite acceptable, if not very good and honestly worn. I'd rather have that watch than some of the ones you posted (a few of which look like laser welded examples). You're also comparing 1960s and early 1970s examples to a late 1970s example, where the case shape differs.

As the person who wrote and runs gmtmaster1675.com, I hope I have a competent opinion on the matter.

I am not engaging with nobody. I do not care if you like to wear and buy poor watches you are free to do it.

I am saying that the case of the watch posted in this topic is poor which is objective and not subjective. I posted 3 different 1675 to offer a general picture of how good cases look like (I am sorry to disappoint you but none of these had laser work) compared to poors one.
Do you want me to post other 1675 I have seen and I have in my archive? We can stay here and post hundred of pictures. Do you want 1675 of the same serial of this one? Do you believe it is rare to find Rolex 1675 out there and I have not seen enough in person?

I really do not understand how you guys can say this is a good case and above all well polished. This case has no crown guards survived (maybe you want to tell me it is a specific shape of that period ) and lugs are very normal.

I see you are happy with your wrong ideas which is fine to me, but do not fall into the trap of becoming too rigid in your beliefs, and leave space for change.

Of course dealers can pop the champagne reading your comments.

"Superficial polishing" ... it is all round ... superficial polishing is the one I posted in picture 5 and 6.

Below is a late 70's example with the case shape and crown guards of the OP's example, and unlike those you posted. Much smaller chamfers and no defined edge at the top surface of the crown guards, unlike the earlier 1675 cases. Yes, the OPs example is more worn and not worth as much as a case like the one below, but are still not "no crown guards survived."

I hope you heed your words:

Good thing I have never bought a Rolex from a dealer; they cannot pop champagne on my behalf.

I haven't owned/collected ceramic bezel GMTs so I won't pretend to know what I'm talking about with them, sorry!

@Fedoclock Your stubborn position is perplexing. Please take some time to educate yourself before making comments that are not accurate. Here's an example of crown guards on an early '70's 1675 case. As you may notice, they have some wear from use and are also unpolished.

I cannot judge from this picture but from just this pic.

I confirm no crown guards survived. All round. It is over polished and everyone with a normal knowledge can easly see it.

Here below a 1675 same serial as the one of the OP...find the differences...