ubiquitous

Blew the dust off this one for today...

This watch is such a difficult piece to photograph I always struggle to get decent shots of it...

16520 today...

Well, there are two different types of 25-127; one has a significantly beveled profile and one has a 'top hat' profile (straight, vertical sides with a small bevel at the top edge). So, it depends on which one you have. 1675/25-116 has a profile as such: a top hat 127 has a profile like this: (that's actually my old Tudor 9411 with 25-125; the only difference between 125 and 127 is the position of the cyclops). I've tried looking through my images to see if I have any old shots of a 25-127 with the steep bevel, but I can't seem to find any...

A 25-127 is going to be too small to fit a 1675 case intended for a 25-116; the 116 is much larger in diameter (and also lower in profile, different bevel etc.). However, if you have one of the older 1655 reps, then the crystal will probably fit as those were (incorrectly) based on the 1680/5513 case.

Thanks for the kind words folks. Yeah, the watch looks great; it's a wonderful piece, but unfortunately not the most comfortable. I can wear it for 8 - 10 hours max before I have to take it off as it's constantly reminding me that it's on the wrist (whereas I can wear any of my Rolexes for days on end; at times I forget I even have a watch on). Migge- You are correct. This one came from Island R, and that's why I can't sell it

My daily beater 5514...

Looking SHARP! Close cousin checking in...

I've had this watch for roughly 3 years; it's spent the last 7 months in pieces and while it was apart I took the opportunity to have the crystal sent out for fresh AR from chief. Just got the crystal back and put it all together; I've been wearing this one off and on for the past few days trying to figure out whether or not it's something I'd wear (to date I've not worn it on very many occassions). After much consideration, I've come to the conclusion that it's a great looking watch. However, I think it's now ready to spend another 3 years in the watchbox...

Been slammed with work at the office, but figured I'd pop in for a sec to say howdy Just rec'd this custom made grey gator and giving it a whirl. It's going through a pretty painful break in period, but it's starting to (slowly) yield to comfort. I'll probably switch back to the Oyster on this one, but the gator is good for a change... Cheers and best! //ubi

Here's a quick pic for you vly...

I'm not certain that a 564/565 is correct for a no-date; my all original '67 165.024 has a 552 inside... 564/565 would be the correct movement if you wanted to build a 166.024 date model, but I believe a 552 would be a more period correct movement for a 165.024...

What happened to your hand, K?

Same ol' F- LOLing over your sig file. I always find your sig and avatar to be mucho entertaining!

Godspeed and best wishes, my friend. Let me know if there's anything I can do for you! R

Let me just say- White dial is definitely my preference!

Christmas attire... + Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, RWG!

Definitely getting excited for Christmas! 5514 for today (as per usual)...

I agree with Ronin. When it comes to vintage Rolex, there are only approximations with nothing hard set in terms of when particular dials started/ended and in whatever combination one might expect to find. While it's possible to outline a rough idea as to when certain dials may have been consistently fitted in specific cases/references, the truth of the matter is that one can never really say with exact certainty when specific dial types were introduced to production assembly, nor in what case/pusher/crown type configuration (Oyster vs. non) they were fitted. There are too many Rolex anomalies spread across their historical production to state that xyz detail is ONLY for this or that reference and cannot be for anything else, or that a specific part couldn't have ever been fitted to a specific reference. Add in the fact that an RSC service can compound the situation further as they have been known to have installed whatever replacement dials they had available or were supplied in the past (and they have even refinished dials I might add), and the grey areas just get greyer. Bottom line, Rolex is and should be treated as open ended when it comes to forming a self hypothesis and so-called 'hard facts'. Cause just when you think something couldn't be possible, an example of that impossibility will surface with evidence to support it's legitimacy.

Hopefully they start releasing something that is NOT Panerai or Rolex.

I find it to be an interesting blend of old meets new. Sort of an odd conundrum mixing a 1970's movement with such a modern design for the case. I can appreciate it for what it is and represents, but not sure I could or would ever want to own one...

Pretty killer piece! These pieces, while they look great in pics tend to look even better in person; they have a depth and level of detail that need to be seen and viewed in hand to fully appreciate. Nice score, S!

I've always like a nice, simple tan in contrast to PVD or DLC:

Ye olde 5514 for today...

You know how there are times when you just know things are destined to go a specific way? Or you’re certain that some things are just meant to be? Well… This happens to be just such an occasion. While there are several people out there that I know would have given this watch a good home, there was one in particular that I knew just had to be. When one has the kind of passion and drive to not lose sight or focus of a goal for several years, well, that my friends is just solid, determined commitment. And it is for that reason that I knew that the 1665 would be going to a good home, and a very deserving one at that. w0lf has helped me in more ways than one, and several times over on a few of my projects. What’s more, like many here on RWG, he has become a great friend and that is something that I hold far more dear than anything else. Thanks for allowing me the honor Cheers and best, R