freddy333

Wow, that is quite a deal! Now, if I can just get ahold of TTK to order a 5513.. Anyone seen TTK around recently?

Not bad, Tribal. Is that the dial the MBW 5513 came with?

My DRSD (running a 2846) has Clark's minute & hour hands. Clark's second hand did not fit the 2846's larger pinion, so I retained the MBW hand, but you can certainly broach Clark's hand if you have the tools. (The apparent bend of the second hand is an anomaly of the imaging process, which was produced using a flatbed scanner)

If you go through the entire site, these guys have some very interesting stuff (though some of it is poorly made), but expensive.

Makes alot of sense on many levels. Thanks.

Compare Subby's to this

I think I used an 11/64" (inch) drill bit. And I have no idea why my previous post got censored. I do not remember the exact word or words I used, but it was something like '[censored]' or 'face', as in the rep tube had a flat [censored] or face. Apparently, the word 'f l a n g e' (without the spaces) is being automatically censored for some reason.

Avitt -- In reference to your watch, I was referring mainly to the normal wearing down of edges that occurs over the course of successive polishings & overhauls it probably would have received by Rolex over the past 3 -4 decades.

As I mentioned elsewhere in another review or thread, if you swapped the dial in my older 116520 rep (this is a watch I got in a UK auction site 3 years ago) with the dial in the 116520 that Andrew is selling, the resulting watch would look like this one.

Avitt -- A brown or rust (or whatever your preference is for aged tritium) artist's pencil should do the trick. No muss, no fuss & and every artist's supply (and some office supply) has them. But, were it mine, I would leave them the way they are. The thing that catches my eye is the overall pristine appearance of the entire watch. The crisp lines and perfectly smooth surfaces. Even after a Rolex overhaul (which is usually the look I go for myself), I do not think the case and dial would look quite that pristine. Actually, I think what bothers me (and it is a relatively minor detail) are the perfectly rounded edges. I think you may have smoothed them a bit too accurately. New, the lines would be crisp & clearly defined. But after 30+ years of use, Rolex overhauls & successive polishings, there would be some irregularities in the lines of the case and bezel. That is why I purposely took a file to the sides of my DRSD (you can see this in some of the recent shots of the He valve side of the watch), so the light would reflect differently in the peaks & valleys of the metal that would have appeared after successive polishes.

Beautiful work & watch, Avitt. My only complaint is that it looks too new (and I only wish I had that problem).

Does anyone know the availability of parts (mainsprings, balance wheels, cap jewels, click springs, etc.) for Valjoux chrono movements? Are all the parts readily available or do you have a problem when a part wears out or breaks? Recommended parts sources?

Yes, I would be interested as well. Your case looks exactly like mine (which was purchased from a UK auction site almost 3 years ago), but your dial does not have the 2 small issues (pointed "A"s in DAYTONA and 3 & 9 subdials too close to the 2 & 10 index markers) that my dial suffers from -- it was your dial that fooled me. And you are right about the sound of the movement -- the 7750 movement is louder and a bit more tinny than the Rolex 4130.

A definite keeper, Tribal. Nice work.

I have emailed Neil and await his response. Knowing yours is a stock 5513 MBW, I hope Neil is able to source it. Either way, I still think your watch looks good.

I agree. This looks gen. You can tell because the tops of the 3 & 9 subdials are the correct distance from the 10 & 2 index markers, and the DAYTONA font is correct. My rep, which is the closest version I have seen to the gen, differs from this one only in those two areas. I do not know why this person is posting a gen watch as a rep unless he himself is unaware, which I would find hard to believe. But anything is possible.

Thanks, this is what I needed. The info in the last 2 TZ threads is what I was looking for & pretty much supports what I had thought all along, that the 5514s were off-the-shelf 5513s with the He valve and Comex label added. But now I feel alot more confident that the 5513 is the correct platform. I guess it's time to contact TTK.

Looks like quite a nice piece of work yourself, Tribal. I did not see a 5513 listed in either TTK's or WM's collections. But TTK does have a 1680. Are the MBW 5513 & 1680 cases the same? If I understand you correctly, they are (I just want to be sure so I do not have to make a 3rd 5514).

Thanks Tribal. The He valve is not an issue (see my previous 'working' He valve tutorials) and I have a nice caseback & a custom stamp to give it a unique 'Comex' ID. But I want to be sure I have the correct case so I can fit a gen bezel insert, pearl, crystal, crown, etc. I already did one 5514, which looks pretty good. But I used a cheap-o Sub as the base (the case is slightly thicker than a standard 5513, but not quite as thick as my MBW 1665) and it has one of those cases where you cannot remove the bezel (or insert) without bending or damaging it. Also, the case will not accept gen parts (crystal, insert, etc.) So I want to take another stab this, but starting with an MBW base so I can use gen parts. From your comments, it sounds like the MBW 5513 is the way to go then. Correct?

The (gen) 5514 Comex 4 Questions Which case did the Comex 5514 use? Was it a standard 5513 Sub case (with the He valve added) or was it the (thicker) case that was later used for the 1665 SD or did Rolex use a case that was somewhere in between the 5513 and 1665? Was the bezel uni- or bi-directional and how many clicks (or was it non-clicking)? Is there an MBW version of the 5514 Comex (that will accept gen crystals, crowns, tubes, etc.)? Which gen movement was used in the 5514 -- 1520 or 1570 -- and has anyone tried to fit either of these into a rep case (MBW or other)?

Repaustria -- Can you go into more detail as to what you did here? What did you change the seconds wheel to and where/why did you install another click wheel?

Which is exactly why so many people replace that movement with a 2846 (21,600 bph) or some other slower movement. There are numerous reviews & tutorials on the subject by way of the Search feature.

Jetsons -- I agree that you do not need the little hoops through which the springbar slides through in the end links (the hollow, folded metal pieces that link/attach the end of the bracelet to the lugs on the watch case). So removing them with the cutting blade of a dremel (or any other tool) is a good idea since the end links will stay securely in place with or without them. But I do not know how you can enlarge the hole in the hollow fixed end link at each end of the bracelet enough to allow a 2mm springbar to fit through without either tearing through the metal 'fabric' or leaving it so thin & weakened that the stress caused by normal wrist movement may cause it to separate and break apart, which could cause you to lose your watch. I guess it could be done, but I would never feel comfortable with my watch held together like that. Another option that did work on 1 end of 1 of my hollow link bracelets was to use a nail punch and widen each side of the hole by gently hammering the punch through each side until the opening widened enough to fit the springbar through. Unfortunately, this ended up causing the link to warp and you can see it when you look at the bracelet. It is not that bad that the average person would see it, but it was bad enough that I decided to just split the seam on the other link instead. And that link (including the seam area) looks completely normal, even at close inspection.

Neither option is optimal, but drilling will thin a relatively wide area of the metal while a broken weld will not. Yes, the weld could pull apart if pressure is exerted upon it, but I think there is less chance of that than there would be if you made the metal thinner from drilling. After considering both options, I chose to break the weld.

This is a good method for expanding the hole in a solid link bracelet, but I am not sure I would drill out the hollow ends. You may either drill through the metal or weaken it so that the bracelet will not be secure. I slid a small flathead screwdriver into the hole and then turned it sideways and worked it back and forth until the weld at the bottom of the link (that forms the enclosure for the springbar to slide through) broke. Then, the gen springbar had enough room to fit.