Monobike (Login Monobike) VRF Member from IP address 22.214.171.124
Still looking for a Gilt GMT, I have been offered this PCG one:
Case's SN is 875k and dial is a T
I raise two questions.
1)Shouldn't it be a Swiss dial for this case period?
2)For me it looks like radium but could it be on a T
Please see below macro's I took yesterday with my iPhone.
Awaiting for your comments.
(no login) 126.96.36.199
Chapter ring dial..
August 1 2012, 8:06 AM
an 875k SN GMT with PCG should have a chapter ring dial. This dial was switched but, it is genuine Rolex
I don't necessarily agree that this GMT, ca. 1962-3, should have a chapter ring dial
August 1 2012, 9:56 AM
...but usually one finds this particular dial later in production, circa 1964-67. What does the caseback date stamp say?
This is a real crossover period for GMTs with a lot of different dials popping up within a 2-3 year serial # range.
Could be that some 1675s were assembled out of sequence, perhaps due to Rolex trying to get their ducks in a row for the new Tritium regulations (T-25). This may have required a swap to the SWISS T-25 dials and delayed the release some watches for as much as a year or two.
So one sees chapter ring, non chapter ring, double SWISS, Underline, etc, all in a relatively short span of 62-64.
BTW, on these, glowing original lume is quite normal and that lume is definitely not Radium.
I would think the original dial for this watch could be either a chapter ring "Tulip" coronet dial or a "serrated" coronet dial w/o ring still probably SWISS-only.
But it's very hard to say with 100% certainty because it may have been Rolex themselves who changed this dial or sold it as "new" some time after the serial number suggests.
Anyone can "dare" add whatever they'd like to the discussion...
August 1 2012, 7:12 PM
...I have studied GMTs but I am not "The Authority" and I am certainly still learning (and trying to learn) all the time.
I gave you my honest opinion and I am happy to hear more opinions on this topic even if they are completely different from mine.
Much like a Sigma-dail 6240 Cosmo from 1965-7, these 2nd gen non-track Swiss T-25 dials do pop up in this ca. 62-63 serial number range--and many do--and they are a bit of an enigma to say the least, as they should come later. But if so many do occur within this period...why? Can't all be collectors swapping sooooo...maybe Rolex early replacements for some reason? Case in point, the watch you show has perfect matching hands to the dial. So maybe some cases sat around after being stamped and serialed for a year or two due to lack of demand (or something else?) and then were dialed?
All opinions welcome on the matter.
This message has been edited by tomvox1 from IP address 188.8.131.52 on Aug 1, 2012 8:15 PM
I do wonder how much reliability one can place on serial numbers having been issued in strict production number order sequence back then, I have a one owner original 5513 1.5m III.66 caseback but a IV 67 bracelet and have spoken to the owner now in his 80's and thats how he bought the watch.
I've also had Rolex Geneva confirm production date on a 3.58m ( 1972) watch and it was as confirmed as produced in 1974 upto 2 years later than the serial number would otherwise suggest. So there is an opportunity as such for watches to have later dials than the serial numbers would suggest, the only concern I have would be any inconsistency with the date of crossover from small to large 24 hour hand.
Lets speculate further, we may also being seeing 2 types on dials in concurrent issue, a US market dial marked with Tritium to comply with their from Jan 1961 AEC requirements for exemption from distribution licencing and the ROW International dials marked Swiss as the Rest of the World did not 'switch' to tritium till after the Spring 1963 Rome Convention.
Its not clear how much Tritium the US was providing in the early 1960's for watch dial painting, tritium was in short supply especially for armaments at that time. Maybe we have a case of Tritium dials to US market and Radium (strontium 90) dials to the rest of the world till the new ROW tritium standards of <27 standard came in place at some point after Spring 1963. I cant prove it but I dont think the US was supplying more tritium than they were obliged to, to satisfy US and International standards in place at that time.
I've calculated at this time that the US market was roughly about 10% of Rolex's sales at that time, there were growing disputes over the heavy US import duty on watches which lead to Common Market intervention soon afterwards and tritium was in short supply. So I can't imagine the US would release more tritium than necessary to service their own market requirements and the Swiss had their own supplies of strontium 90.
Interesting times indeed.
This message has been edited by fatboyharris from IP address 184.108.40.206 on Aug 2, 2012 3:03 AM This message has been edited by fatboyharris from IP address 220.127.116.11 on Aug 2, 2012 2:42 AM This message has been edited by fatboyharris from IP address 18.104.22.168 on Aug 2, 2012 1:48 AM
Then the point is: Is it worth getting a watch without being sure that the dial is original to it just because it is really nice and hands match perfectly to the dial (even though the second hand is relumed for sure) ?
As I am not purchasing a price or an investment but a watch, I just want to be sure that I get the right watch with "as much as original parts as possible" in it.
Therefore and according to your comments, getting a Swiss dial for a 875k case sounds more coherent and more plausible.
and the generaly accepted consensus would put chapter ring dials with Swiss as the reliable association with those GMT's, that doesn't mean to say that the Tritium gloss dial is not correct, but generally accepted as being more likely a later service replacement, but that may not hold true for all watches.
You are buying greater certainty of period correctness with a chapter ring dial, but the other dial is a great dial and may be period correct.
To be honest, if you look at the Dial Archive, you can see...
August 2 2012, 5:05 PM
...that GMT dials during this period are all over the place. And that serial numbers & date stamps seem to be a bit as well.
I think it is hard to say what is the exact correct dial for this watch because there appear to be so many is a very short window 62-63.
My guess is that Rolex were using up the old minute track versions while the new non-track versions were beginning to be installed concurrently.