Question about OHMSS Rolex Ref. 6238

canoe2

I just published a post on affordable alternatives for the Rolex chronograph ref. 6238 from OHMSS. But I have a question so I can make sure I have my facts straight: are the hour and minute hands on the watch dark grey or light silver? The pics from the most recent auction show them as being silver:



http://www.artcurial.com/en/asp/fullCatalogue.asp?salelot=M1010++++400+&refno=20002161

But pics from this article from forum favorite :v "James Bond Watches Blog" shows the hands as being black (or dark grey):



http://jamesbondwatchesblog.com/2010/09/29/want-to-buy-the-original-george-lazenby-james-bond-rolex-chronograph/

The JBWB article's pics actually come from a 3rd party (Matthew Bain Inc.) and claim to be of the actual Lazenby worn watch. However, the article states:

"Of particular note in authenticating this pre-Daytona reference 6238 chronograph is the case number on the physical watch worn by George Lazenby as James Bond in the Eon Productions film, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service. Christie’s lists that as 1206613."

But Artcurial (the current auction house) states in the description for the watch that the sale includes:

"Copy of the purchase invoice of the Christie's sale, and copy of the sales July 11, 2008 to the current owner, who mentions Rolex Chronograph Ref 6238 Serial 1206513. This is the actual watch worn by James Bond George Lazenby in the Bond movie in Her Majesty's Secret Service."

And

"It was at the end of filming Eon Productions decided to sell his personal wardrobe and accessories of the film, including the famous Rolex. This piece was acquired by the accounting of production, which offered for sale at Christie's London, South Kensington, on 16 December 2003. It is important to note that during this sale, an error was made in the catalog description indicates the number of series 1206613 instead of 1206513. the watch is sold directly by the purchaser of this sale to the current owner, a private collector."

To be fair, JBWB did do a follow up post on this topic back in 2011 (http://jamesbondwatchesblog.com/2011/11/28/so%E2%80%94-is-it-the-george-lazenby-james-bond-chronograph-or-not/).

In any event, all this is just adding to my confusion.

In the screen grab I used in my post, the hands look dark grey (or a very dark silver), but that just may be a trick of the light. I watched the film closely to try and get a concrete answer, but I still can't be 100% sure.



Can one of the watch experts here help me out? I really want to make sure the info I share with other fans is as accurate as possible.

welshboy78

Interesting. Sure somebody will chip in

I did read the article on http://www.jamesbondlifestyle.com/news/george-lazenby-james-bond-rolex-chronograph-6238-auction

Which stated the Chrono hand was changed to red at the request of EON (guess to make it stand out in the film during the timing sequence)

Higgins

Just wanted to add, that Jamesbondcollectibles had such a watch for years on their webpage for around $ 50.000 claiming that it was the screenused watch.
I was interested back then and remember that they had a handwritten (Bucherer??) receipt for this watch on the name of EON for evidence.

I don't have the pic anymore and I am not sure, if it's the same watch which is now auctioned off.

But if it is, it should have the cash receipt along with it.

Higgins

Ok, just reading the item description, it says that there is a Bucherer receipt with the watch.
Would be interesting to see the receipt, and check if the numbers match

welshboy78

Hands look more grey on the examples quickly found on chrono etc (if original)

http://www.chrono24.com/en/rolex/chronograph--id4237493.htm?urlSubpath=/rolex/ref-6238.htm&referenceNumber=6238$221&manufacturerIds=221

Will fire the HD up for the scene

welshboy78

I cant even tell the chrono hand is red on the blu ray rip. All the hands looks dark

ppw3o6r

This sounds like a job for....Dum Dum Dum Dum Daaaar......DEATONMAN!

canoe2

Welshboy: in most of the articles I read in my research for the post, it's stated that the red second was added at the request of Eon for the film to be part of a "compass" feature on the watch, but that was never included in the movie. The pic of the watch used in the JBL article is the one with the black hands: http://www.jamesbondlifestyle.com/product/rolex-chronograph-6238 and the photo credit is to Christies (I am assuming from either the 2003 or 2008 auction).



Higgins: What I can't figure out is what the error in the 2003 Christies' auction listing actually means (listing it as 1206613 instead of 1206513), and what Artcurial is claiming. Did Christies sell the wrong watch back in 2003? If so, then how did that watch also come with the receipt from Bucherer, as stated in the 2003 article from JBWB that includes the Christies' listing info?

http://jamesbondwatchesblog.com/2003/12/16/christies-auction-on-her-majestys-secret-service-rolex-chronograph/

Why doesn't Mr. Bain have this receipt? And even if he did have it, why are the hands in the 2003 Christies auction pics black and the hands in the Artcurial auction pics silver?

Also, if you compare the images of the inside case back Mr. Bain provided JBWB:



with the image of the inside case back from the Artcurial auction:



They are very different. Mr. Bains has numbers hand etched under the "2". But the Artcurial pic shows etchings almost everywhere except under the 2.

So that's where I am with my research so far.

canoe2

Welshboy: no doubts that the seconds hand was red. Interesting that on that Chrono post, the owner of the watch blacks out the number in the 4th pic, and leaves just the 1206 visible:



ppw3o6r: I was actually a little nervous about mentioning JBWB as a research source around these parts ...

Higgins

Those little engravings are watchmaker's infos about services which have been done.
Every 4-6 years, there is usually a new mark.


It's obvious that we see 2 different casebacks in the 2 pics. But the conclusion can't be done that those are 2 different watches - casebacks can be easily swapped.

canoe2

Higgins wrote:

Those little engravings are watchmaker's infos about services which have been done.
Every 4-6 years, there is usually a new mark.


It's obvious that we see 2 different casebacks in the 2 pics. But the conclusion can't be done that those are 2 different watches - casebacks can be easily swapped.

I don't think there's any question about them being two different watches, unless someone also swapped out the black hands for silver hands as well as changing the case back and changed the number between the lugs. And if, going back at least to 2003, people were calling the Christie's watch the Lazenby watch, I would think keeping all the original parts would be a priority.

There's a TL;DR at the end of this post to save people the suffering of reading through all this ...

Reading more about all this, it seems that:

- In 2003, Christie's made an error in their auction listing for the watch, identifying it as 6613 instead of 6513 (many sites have mentioned this, including JBL's most recent article about the Artcurial auction). However, the Christie's auction did include the original paperwork from Bucherer and Rolex. So whoever bought the watch in 2003 should have the paperwork to go with it. Would Christie's clarify this error later? It seems like no one has heard from them about it.

- Certain people have been using Christies' listing error as the basis to claim that the 6613 watch is THE Lazenby watch. As of 2010 that seemed to be Matthew Bain Inc. although a June 30, 2016 article at Time Piece Chronicle states that the 6613 is currently with The Dina Collection pawn shop (this also another source that mentions Christie's error in the 2003 auction listing).

http://www.timepiecechronicle.com/features/2016/6/30/found-the-real-pre-daytona-chronograph-worn-by-george-lazenby-and-its-for-sale

- The Dina Collection listing for the watch does include a pic of the number between the lugs, clearly showing 6613. Their pic of the 6613 dial also shows it as having black hour/minute hands (as in the pics shared by M. Bain Inc with JBWB). They are asking $120 000 for the watch, I am assuming based on the Bond connection since the listing is titled "Rolex Chronograph watch from the James Bond movie "Her Majesty's Secret Services"" (error in the movie title is their's; real confidence booster):

http://www.thedinacollection.com/James_Bond_s_Rolex_watch_p/jm_w.htm





- Through all of this, the people involved in the ownership and sale of the 6613 watch since 2010 say they never had the paperwork associated with watch (bill of sale, note, etc.) that was included in the 2003 Christies' auction.

- Back in Nov 2010, in this thread on Vintage Rolex Forum, someone named "K" claims that M.Bain's 6613 is NOT the Lazenby Rolex, and the real one is actually with a private owner in Europe (K's client). In the same thread, "IanT" discusses his interactions with someone on Ebay selling the 6613 (this sounds like the same woman M.Bain claims he got the 6613 from in 2010).

http://vintagerolexforum.com/ (sorry, I can't link directly to that forum thread, but search for Lazenby Rolex and it's the 5th one down; I found this info from JBWB).

- Meanwhile, the original listing for the 2003 Christie's auction is no longer online, and the only pics I can find from that auction are the stock ones like the one from JBL (with photo credit to Christie's):

http://www.jamesbondlifestyle.com/product/rolex-chronograph-6238



And this Dec, 2003 photo from Getty images from the auction:



Maybe I'm crazy, but both of those pics seem to show black (or least dark silver) hands.

- And moving on to the Artcurial auction ... A close-up of the serial number between the lugs of the watch at Artcurial shows the "065" and "3" pretty clearly and they are claiming that the number is 6513.



They also claim to have all the paperwork and can trace the provenance of the watch back at least as far as the original buyer at the 2003 Christie's auction. The pics of their watch also show it having light silver hands with a flat hour hand with a squared end:

http://www.artcurial.com/en/asp/fullcatalogue.asp?salelot=M1010++++400+&refno=20002161&image=6



While the Christie's 2003 auction watch (again) appears to have dark silver/black hands with a beveled, slightly tapered hours hand:



So ....

First, sorry again for this being so long winded, I just really find all this interesting ...

Conclusions, Questions and TL;DR:

The 6613 Rolex being offered right now for $120 000 at Dina Collection is not the OHMSS watch: weird/suspicious provenance, different case back, no paperwork, and multiple sources report Christie's made an error in the 2003 auction listing (it should have been listed as 6513 not 6613). Possibly someone swapped out the stock black seconds hand for a red seconds hand to make it look SA.

I believe Artcurial does have the authentic OHMSS watch (6513; the one purchased at the 2003 Christie's auction), but I still can't figure out how the hands went from dark silver/black with what looks like a beveled hour hand at the Christie's auction to light silver hands with a flat hour hand at the Artcurial auction. I'm not entirely convinced that the watch had light silver hands at the Christie's auction and it was just lighting that made them look dark in the pics from 2003. That still wouldn't explain why the hour hand looks different. And I don't think someone buying an authentic Bond watch would start changing parts once he/she owned it.

So, that's where I'm stuck and I still can't figure out if the watch in OHMSS (what we see on-screen) had dark or light hands.

welshboy78

Looks dark in the film however I would not put money on that since its hard to even see the red chrono hand

canoe2

welshboy78 wrote:

Looks dark in the film however I would not put money on that since its hard to even see the red chrono hand

I've stopped relying on screenshots from the film for 100% confirmation. As you say, even the red hand looks black. But in the screen shots I do have (and after watching that gondala shack scene about 20 times), it does appear that there is more contrast between the hour/minute hands and the silver watch dial than what we see in the pics of the watch from Artcurial, with the light silver hands.

Bond Collectors' Weekends

"The precise timing will be essential. Remember--nothing must be changed."