Please consider donating to help offset our high running costs.
Went through this one completely again and bringing it up again.
If you ask me: one of the best and most important threads from - at least - this year. Don't want it to vanish in the depths of the database.
Read it if you haven't yet, read it..
Agreed. For those who are new to vintage GMT's, it's an eye opener, for more seasoned collectors it's become the norm. Tons of fake mid-cases, dials, hands and inserts floating around. Heck, a few that were posted on OF even raised my suspension. See if the story hangs, is the mid-case too clean but the dial and hands show signs of wear. How does the caseback look? Is it too new or shiny to be appropriate for a 40+yr old watch? How does the crown guard and lug holes look compared to the rest of the watch? Re-cut, not a problem as long as all different parts of the watch corroborate the condition.
I urge everyone to conduct their due diligence accordingly and nothing beats handling the watch in person prior to making a final decision.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BmwiI9nHQVs/?hl=en&taken-by=losangeleswatchworks
Of course a true watch nerd would spot that the lugs became thinner in the process. That's the choice, soft rounded lugs or sharp but slightly thinner ones.
View attachment 623940
Are they thinner? I was under the impression that material was added and then polished.
RE: GMT 1675. They are thinner for sure, look how thin that bottom right lug:
Not the exact same model (different crown guards) but you get the idea, this is the unpolished one:
https://www.watchprosite.com/rolex/a-case-primer-for-the-rolex-1675--unpolished-/732.791448.5303788/
This is an interesting article.
Honestly I think the angle of the photos are deceiving so it doesn't immediately look thinner to me. Also I'm not surprised RSC actually makes lugs thinner. My comment was more directed at third party case refinishers.
2) Another thing that I don't think has been mentioned explicitly is the variety of case/crown guard shapes seen on what are considered 'rounded' or standard matte dial crown guards. Please see below - the Mark 1 crown guards start beveling very far out from the case (usually lines up with the outer edge of the threads on the crown) and the sides of the crown guards are more vertical whereas the later examples have more and more rounded sided and a bevel that starts much closer to the case. I'm trying to see if there are particular serial ranges that correspond but I don't have enough info to include on my site (gmtmaster1675.com) yet.
Mark 5
vintage is a minefield, and not for the uninitiated. I always appreciate the insight of the collectors and those more knowledgeable. That and patience, patience is key.
Mark 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 refer to the dial and not the case. The crown guards are all a little different even when looking at unpolished examples. It's surprising how different the bevel on the crown guard can be on watches with the same dial and from the same year.
I asked Springer about this and he told me "The lines on the GMTs are all over the place, not unlike the thickness of crown guards on the vintage Submariners. Nothing is 100% the same on these older watches"