Rare Sea Dweller or Fake?

[Chinnock]

Spotted this;

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... 411wt_1123

Then I dug around for more info;

http://uncleaj.myfastforum.org/archive/ ... _1195.html

Based on the info regarding these watches I assume this one is a fake (10 years out) and funny looking service papers and mismatched hands (but that could be Rolex servicing for you).

[Mike Wood]

Not reaching for my chequebook...

[nanuq]

That's wrong in so many ways I don't know where to begin.

Start with the most obvious: the papers say Submariner 5512/3 but it's got a flat sapphire crystal. And Uncle AJ's site lists the case designation as a 1665, which is a Sea Dweller ... not a Sub.

I'm with Mike, leave your checkbook at home.

[NJH]

Its not just the orangey dial but the crystal that stands out for me. Its flush with the bezel :shock:

[IANAN]

Agree that the paperwork (5512-3) does not seem to match what seems to be an Omani Sea Dweller.

[monogroover]

That's wrong in so many ways I don't know where to begin.

Start with the most obvious: the papers say Submariner 5512/3 but it's got a flat sapphire crystal.

Looks more like a subtly domed acrylic crystal to me. Not saying it's authentic, mind you.

[GraniteQuarry]

Absolute fake dial - the L of RoLex is too much to the left, it should be centred below the coronet :wink:

[c24/7]

Mike has spoken...

:!: :blackeye:

[thattallchap]

offered a £5 as the end pieces look genuine!

[jrpippen]

Bloody crooks.

Get the back off and let's see the moyota in all it's glory!