Authentic or non Rolex Sub 16613 bracelet 93253 W series?? Help~~~

[KayzHeiden]

Hi, folks, in recent my bro went on holiday to HongKong and purchase a 2nd hand Sub TT 16613 from a shop there at est $8700sgd... My foolish bro are those who take and go type, didnt even ask the shop to open the parts for verification. It comes with box, certs thou.

Now I myself have a sub 16613 from 2003, his sub is W series (95/96) with sliver dial diamonds, upon close comparison, the sub look slight thinner and longer, the bracelet 93253 should be the older one with stainless streel clap.

Now I notice the divers extention is very different from mine, its not the same and kinda flimy without locking, and the model no imprint on the bracelet at the bottom of the bracelet *which most old 93253 has* was BIGGER than mine. Can anyone verify if it should be like that???

I have been searching thru the net and couldnt find an answer.

Any verification is greatly appreciated. thanks.,

[taxico]

pics.

[skydweller_sg]

i suggest your bro seek help from rolex center ... btw he might also want to authenticate the diamond dial

[JAMYLIM]

Bro,

I found one similar model on ebay...see whether can get any useful details from it... http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rolex-Mens-S...item589c25ad9e

If I were you - I will quickly rush down to Rolex Centre to verify it...the longer you hesitate the more anxious you get and maybe harder for your brother to get a refund (if its really not original). But my gut feeling is that it should turn out fine.(hopefully I'm right).

[Darkangel]

The sub looks thinner and longer? I think best to take pics lah if not we cannot imagine it also.

[taxico]

maybe the sub is going through puberty...

[alantannottam]

hehehe. funny comment, taxico

agreed with whats said. go down to da Centre and have it verified liao

[KayzHeiden]

thanks for yr effort in finding a pic... Its the same watch... but the bracelet no are much bigger! .... oh no... I try to take pics shortly...

[KayzHeiden]

Hi folks have already upload the photos...

http://www.sg-roc.com/album.php?albu...chmentid=10451


One of the photos have 2 subs... mine was on the left and his was right.

[skydweller_sg]

the dial looks authentic; but not sure about the bracelet
noticed also the case is very heavily polished
that's probably the reason why you felt it looked 'thinner and longer'

i would do a full authentication at rolex center asap

[Darkangel]

No lah the bracelet being thinner shouldn't be caused by polishing. It's just that the older bracelets were thinner.

[Alexlow]

My 9mil series 16803's "93153" engraving is smaller but that doesn't means yours is fake. It's could just be from a different mk? What is the clasps code?
I'll post a pic to for your reference when I can.

[skydweller_sg]

bro, i dont think TS was referring to the bracelet when he mentioned 'thinner and longer' - he should be referring to the whole watch

Quoting TS' words:
"...the sub look slight thinner and longer, ..."

No lah the bracelet being thinner shouldn't be caused by polishing. It's just that the older bracelets were thinner.

[rockdaman]

to me it is pretty authentic...just over polished.

[KayzHeiden]

No lah the bracelet being thinner shouldn't be caused by polishing. It's just that the older bracelets were thinner.

Hi, thanks for the advise. what I am referring to thinning... is the side of the rolex watch, *dunno how to say the terms* the main watch excluding the bracelet is thinner than my 2003 16613... you can compare on the side mine are thicker than his... Could it because the SUB 16613 in the 90s are slighter different from 20s??