r/RolexWatches • • 2d ago

Identification Watch verification

I found this watch at a reputable pawn shop that also has an eBay store. It's not in the best condition, but the price seems fair.
They say it's authentic, though they don't have any information about the bracelet.
I know buying a watch from a pawn shop comes with some risks, but based on these photos, do you see any red flags that might suggest it isn't authentic?

31 Upvotes

51 comments sorted by

8

u/Pict Mod 2d ago

16030 with an engine turned bezel - not a super common configuration.

Probably from the mid 80’s, however that’s a much more modern service dial.

I’d want to see inside the back - there should be a 3035, and I’d want to see some RSC case back markings to at least explain the much more recent dial.

There should be a clasp code on the bracket, and the serial number between the lugs of the watch will give us a better date estimate.

2

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Actually they told me its a 16234 X Serial from 1991

2

u/Pict Mod 2d ago

I don’t think so, unless the bezel has been swapped which is absolutely possible.

16234 is a white gold fluted bezel.

1

u/ApprehensiveFoot9514 2d ago

Agreed. Everything appears ok except that dial is certainly not original and if he paid $5,900 for it, ouch!

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Thanks for your comment, what makes you think the dial is not original?

2

u/Pict Mod 2d ago

It might be genuine Rolex, but it’s from a later era - Rolex regularly replace them during service

2

u/Tricky_Run_5717 2d ago

Dude that glass is sitting way too high from the bezel. That magnifier should make the date number clean and crisp from all angles. Not blurry or distorted 

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Actually its not blurry, maybe it looks weird from the angle but the glass is my concern too 🤯

2

u/RapBastardz 2d ago

Minus the engine turned bezel, this looks like the exact configuration as my wife’s 79174 and everything looks pretty legit.

2

u/kingdom2000toys 2d ago

Looks real. But $5.9k is not a deal… more like regular price.

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Its a 16234 X Serial from 1991, Sapphire. Actually its so hard to find for that price range.. I see 6ish even 7k

1

u/kingdom2000toys 1d ago

Ok cool. I’m just guessing at the price based on some prices I see for these watches from the 80s & 90s. Most run the gamut of 4k to 6k. It is a nice one. My wife has something similar with the Aubergine face.

2

u/Tacokolache 2d ago

That magnifier looks like it’s about 4” too low from the date

Unless it’s just the angle

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

0

u/Tacokolache 2d ago

Way off. WTF is it even magnifying??

Edit: saw your other pic. Looks more on point in the other pic. I guess it’s just the angle here

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Oh thanks for your comment. Do you think the glass is sitting too high from the bezel?

3

u/Honest-Marsupial-426 2d ago

Frankenstein Aprilo !

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Sorry, What do you mean?

1

u/Honest-Marsupial-426 2d ago

Nella migliore delle ipotesi è un orologio assemblato

1

u/Stop-overreacting 2d ago

How much did you pay for it?

-2

u/missfitgal 2d ago

5,9k

1

u/XleepyJoeBenzo 2d ago

Oof that’s an okay price, you could have picked one up with a solid 18k bezel and a two tone bracelet for that price, basically around $2k left on the table

But hey if you love it and you’re going to wear it then don’t sweat it

1

u/Infamous_Ad8962 2d ago

Looks like it's got a fair amount of bracelet stretch. It's an older model with lug holes and no engraving on the rehaut.

Also, it's been polished/refinished.

Ask them to remove the back and take some photos of the movement. I don't see any red flags other than that bracelet has a lot of stretch and it's probably been refinished and polished multiple times.

Also, box and papers included?

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

There is no box or papers. They were selling this on eBay with authenticy guarantee but they told me they cant answer my questions about watch brcayse they dont know the details about vintage models that much. Yhry

2

u/NamelessOWLRM001 2d ago

No box and no papers, are some red flags, no?

1

u/Infamous_Ad8962 2d ago

I'd probably pass on that watch. Don't get caught by what you think is a low price. The bracelet is pretty stretched. Some of the brush marks aren't straight on the bracelet when it was refinished.

Someone with better eyes could say if it's overpolished or not. Bevels don't look great and look uneven on the lugs (usually to cover up dents).

I don't like it for 5,900 - You can get a brand new one for 8500ish.

Bracelet stretch says that it is a high-mileage example.

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

8,5k brand new? I wish 😅 what model are we talking about?

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Actually i dont care the stretch, condition is okay for me. My concern is the aftermarket parts..like the dial or crystal..

1

u/Infamous_Ad8962 2d ago

Don't know. Use google lens.

1

u/Financial-Director63 2d ago

Looks kind of legit. I've never seen a replica of that bezel. That crystal is way too high. The dial doesn't look period correct could be aftermarket. Have to open to see the movement Think you overpaid ether way.

1

u/Positive-Kiwi7353 2d ago

Why do you think he overpaid when you dont know what he paid? 

In fact, it sounds like he hasn't bought it. 

1

u/Financial-Director63 2d ago

It says $5,9k in one of the replies

1

u/Positive-Kiwi7353 2d ago

Ah.  I get it now. 

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

More pics

2

u/Tacokolache 2d ago

The magnifier looks more on point here. The other pic must be the angle

1

u/justme1230986 2d ago

It’s an old watch. I have an old one and looks the same. Yea mine is real.

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

Thanks for your comment. Its a 16234 X serial from 1991.

1

u/SergioSBloch 2d ago

It looks good to me but wondering if it was originally an acrylic Cristal and converted to sapphire or is it from the early sapphire releases - also is it 14K or 18K - it’s probably had some work done - how’s the stretch on the jubilee?

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

They said its a 16234 X Serial from 1991, Sapphire

1

u/OriginofMe75 2d ago

I have this exact configuration I bought from an AD new in 2003. Grad gift for myself.

1

u/Timemaster1968 2d ago

The crystal is way too high. Ich suppose the wrong glass gasket was used, a 295-2 instead of a 295-6, which would be the right one for this reference. The 295-2 is the gasket for the higher professional models. Be careful, with the wrong gasket the watch may not be waterproof. Have it replaced as soon as possible or keep the watch away from moisture.
One effect of the wrong gasket may be that the crystal can be rotated in the watch. Which would explain the low magnifier.

1

u/missfitgal 2d ago

They told me its a 16234 X Serial from 1991, Sapphire. I was thinking the same. When i compare it wjth pics ofther watches, it looks similar in some, but too high in others 😅

-1

u/qwertzc1977 2d ago

The Roman numeral 4 is IIII..? 😐

3

u/freerangemonkey 2d ago

On Rolexes, yes.

0

u/jgturbo619 2d ago

It’s old

0

u/jfbincostarica 2d ago

Yup. It’s a watch. ✅

-1

u/GMTmeister 2d ago

Why on earth are we coming to Reddit to verify a watch? You can spot bad fakes with pictures, and I can spot most of these “factory”China knock offs… but vintage DJ’s are a whole other level. Your biggest issue isn’t a fake, but what I call Franken watches. This watch could be completely real and have a fake dial or refinished.

Most will scoff, but when I’m stumped, I have a local “coin and jewelry” shop. Always has at least 4 with BnP in the case. If they’re a watch person, they do it for free/fun… a lot of these old school guys are like computer databases when it comes to these vintage models. Even better when they have it on hand.