old rolex, any good

[matt12023]

while browsing watchfinder to see if they have a speedmaster, they dont

I came across this and find myself strangely drawn to it

rolexy linky



is it really that old and thus is it actually any good?

[andy tims]

The GMT is (as are all Rolex Sports models) - very good watches. I'm not expert, but this may help.

http://www.gmtmasterhistory.com/index.html

Edited by andy tims on Friday 19th February 14:10

[matt12023]

thanks for that, i like the story behind the gmt

looks like they have the age wrong though, linky says the 1675 was from 1959-1980, it has the large gmt hand so thats up to late 60's , but 55 years old would make it 1954/55

[Bunglist]

I would buy the GMT II as the adjustment of the date and third hand is a lot easier and they are not that different in the cost.

[Incredible Sulk]

Bunglist said:

I would buy the GMT II as the adjustment of the date and third hand is a lot easier and they are not that different in the cost.

Yeah, but aren't the 'pepsi' GMT's more collectible?

As far as the watch goes, is the bracelet the right one? I thought the 78360 bracelet didn't have the lock tab?

The first Rolex I ever bought was a Pepsi GMT on a Jubilee bracelet. I wish I had kept it, as it is the only GMT I ever saw on a Jubilee.

[matt12023]

Bunglist said:

I would buy the GMT II as the adjustment of the date and third hand is a lot easier and they are not that different in the cost.

you mean like?

GMT II

bit more pricey, but then lot newer

Edit, ah just noticed Dom has a couple of the two tone ones as well, trying to figure out which I prefer, though the master II is unworn which is appealing.

The fourth hand is a quirk I like but would you have one of these over a speedy pro? to be fair all going well I can get the other next year, thus which would you have first? and two tone bezel or black?

Edited by matt12023 on Friday 19th February 20:07

[huytonman]

Im wearing a 5512 submariner from around 1965 this week, its a cool as Mr.kelvins predictions....yes they are very good...

[stiglet]

I bought a GMT new in 1987 from an AD for £750. It's hardly been off my wrist since. So I'd say "yes" they are quite good. (but then I would say that, wouldn't I )

[wigsworld]

Incredible Sulk said:

Bunglist said:

I would buy the GMT II as the adjustment of the date and third hand is a lot easier and they are not that different in the cost.

Yeah, but aren't the 'pepsi' GMT's more collectible?

As far as the watch goes, is the bracelet the right one? I thought the 78360 bracelet didn't have the lock tab?

The first Rolex I ever bought was a Pepsi GMT on a Jubilee bracelet. I wish I had kept it, as it is the only GMT I ever saw on a Jubilee.

No the bracelet isn't right, shouldn't have the lock.

[matt12023]

Combined with them getting the date wrong and the strap being wrong then I wouldnt bother with that one.

But it has got me thinking now whether I should go for a GMT over a speedypro, Doms got a couple of the two tone ones in as well as an unworn master II.

I like the look of them pretty much equally, so its more down to whether the added cachet rolex has over omega is worth the extra money and which would hold its value better

[Nolar Dog]

Get the GMT II.

At least it's different from the usual Speedmaster choice.

And a much better looking watch.

[5avvy]

Go for the one you like the most. If you buy a used Speedy Pro or a used GMT neither of them are going to lose you much if you look after them.

[Incredible Sulk]

matt12023 said:

Combined with them getting the date wrong and the strap being wrong then I wouldnt bother with that one.

But it has got me thinking now whether I should go for a GMT over a speedypro, Doms got a couple of the two tone ones in as well as an unworn master II.

I like the look of them pretty much equally, so its more down to whether the added cachet rolex has over omega is worth the extra money and which would hold its value better

FWIW I have a few Rollies and a few Omegas, including a Speedmaster. As I said on a thread a while back, the advantage with any Rolex, even the dress ones, is that they are bulletproof. You can wear them all the time, anywhere. I go sailing wearing mine, snorkelling, I just don't think about the watch at all. The Speedmaster is much more delicate affair. I wouldn't wear it if I went swimming, and I wouldn't wear it in the shower.

As far as the strap on the GMT being 'wrong' , all that's wrong is that is fitted with an Oysterlock catch - the bit that folds over the clasp to keep it shut - and for that particular watch it shouldn't have one. I think they (locking clasps) can be retro-fitted, although Rolex might not want to sell you the bit, as they are a bit funny about things like that. It's only as wrong as say having a TR6 that has alloys instead of the standard fitment steel wheels. And FWIW the locking clasp is quite good at keeping the watch on your wrist.

Personally, I think the older style GMT's look better than the new ones. And if you like that style, you could also think about an Explorer II, which is basically the same as a GMT II, but with a non rotating 24 hour bezel. They can be had for reasonably sensible money.

[matt12023]

thats a good point about robustness, if i'm spending that much on a watch its getting some wearing