thewightstuff

thanks for all the comments guys. i left the dial outside in the sun and weather covered with some dirt while i was away and dusted it off when i got back. it looks less crusty in real life somehow but i didnt want to clean it too much until i had some reference point to work against. same with the case as TMG spotted too. you are definately right that its just not right by any stretch. its newness really bugs me but how to age one properly? my gen vintage rolex subs are worn in but not all dings and scratches so clearly just beating it up isnt the answer to this problem. they are just softer somehow for want of a better word but still nice and clean. i was fortunate to get a look at a really good range of gens, both 6152 and 3646 over the weekend (if only i had had a mask and could run quicker, handling over 10 different gens was amazing and frustrating all at once) and now have a real idea ref moving forwards. they were all really polished, none were brushed at all which means i can "age" my case by just sanding heavily and buffing it up to soften it down....i hope. im going to do it this week. dials ranged from mint to obviously used but none were as "dusty" as mine so im going to address that by just cleaning the face up some more. markers on mine are pretty good. the varnish has worked nicely combined with the weathering so im pretty pleased there especially with regards to matching the hands for colour and texture. i'll need to get a blank dial to use for version 2 now though since the engraving is wrong on this davisen version and even filled in with black its still there and irking me. an engraved radiomir dial with correct font would be great but where to source? theres plenty of good pics around so you think it wouldnt be too hard.... as for straps, im working on that but am always appreciative of suggestions. ive sourced (i think) a gen GPF buckle and am just trying to look for an old strap. theres a few pop up but im always too slow but i may have it licked this time round. will post more when i have some info. the one on there is a nice strap in its own right, its a greg stevens crazy horse but it is a weak point on this vintage project for sure. my case back is too thin is the one annoyance im going to struggle with. the gens were thicker metal, noticeably so, and my non brevatto engraving i need to address too but i am out of ideas at the moment with that. with it being a 1950 case theres limited alternatives sadly though the greater accuracy of the case itself is worth this small point. marco, that would be great ref the movement engraving. let me know details etc. did you ever get the dial i posted you? if not let me know and i will send you another as i got a package with a few over while i was away.

its a cortebert with the wheel changed for a non engraved one. i did go through a spell where i thought about trying to have a rolex bridge added or rolex engraved there but decided it wasnt really necessary and any engraving would ruin the movement. if i find a rolex movement i will swap it out. the earlier watches didnt have rolex engraving so im not too fussed though it would be nice for sure to see that name through the back window marking its heritage. i agree ref brevetatto on the caseback. id like to get this added thats for sure but am out of places to have it done where it will look authentic. skills like that are getting few and far between just like most things. theres a million places can engrave by numbers if you will, bog standard template work but cant take on the more artistic jobs. getting a spacer ring a few years back in sure would have been easy enough and most watch workshops could have knocked one out. now you are left trying to make one oneself as watchmakers dont know the first place to start nor have the inclination sadly. any ideas? the straps not cutting it for me either though i will tackle it next. either hand make with some old leather or scour paneristi

finally got back after 3 months away with work and back to working on my 6152/1 project. its taken some time and fiddling about using a 1950 case as the foundation as i much prefer its shape against the original than other options particularly with regards to the case recess for the CG feet. its got a nice 616 in there, some gen hands, plexi front, display caseback, alot of case work and a dial that im getting there with though its a long process, particularly with having the original hands lume material as the marker for the dial numerals to match against. snaps arent the best though to be honest its not my strong point anyways. its much nicer in the flesh.....honest. wanted to give it a look much like most of the 3646 going about that actually were used for purpose. im sure all the vintage fans have seen the xpane pdf with some great pics just need to get davidsen to work on his engraving on his dials so that the text font actually looks like the original and i'd be a happy man. lots of room for improvement, i think this will be a continuing work in progress however with gen parts being pretty much impossible its frustratingly DIY for the most part. anyone got any tips, thoughts, points to rectify etc they are all welcome. ive been looking at this thing and gen pics so long ive gone cross eyed. thinking out loud i wish someone would make a case with a screw on front bezel instead of the press fit. room for improvement with my movement install. might need to try a mk2 spacer ring or chase down flavorflav as he does some great work. huge thanks needs to go out to marco, both for his help, morale support, inspiration and being a friend.

doc, i really like any interactions with you too. its great to read opinions even when they arent in step with ones own but know there is clear thought in there and leave having a think. intelligent dialogue is often sadly lacking and thats not just limited to fora (is that even the plural of forum anyway?) ive been thinking on this some more over the course of the evening and wonder if what is being experienced is just simply the effects of increased interest into a narrow field in some sense. collecting attracts a special type of people, mostly dysfunctional in some base sense ( i laughed at your aspurgers comment, im not sure this is the afflication i would choose but get the jist) and i know i have many of the traits in a small scale, hoarding, anal, obsessive and unsatisfied and have to try in some way to rationalise them through in order to limit what is essentially their damage. perhaps watches are just a powder keg of an item for this sort of behaviour. the rise in "interest" of vintage meant that theres now a large portion of collectors rather than enthusiasts involved (one can be both but being one doesnt by default imply the other). this brings with it all the "baggage" of the collectors and when mixed in these circumstances with a product thats limited in supply, luxury in an economic sense and high value in terms of cost its just almost an explosion waiting to happen and thats just what we have seen. sadly these very same factors probably catch collectors interests just as much as they make great fuel for things going crazy. the high initial entry cost means that while you need quite a bit of disposable income to get on the ladder it also means that those that do can afford in some sense to fuel prices into a very strange orbit. nanuq, i agree about contagious. ive been annoyed by the modern insert on my 5512 everytime i wear it for the last few months for no reason other than its not got thick numbers. its ridiculous. as for the dial... have no fear. if it doesnt shift i will buy it just to prove myself right. ill be able to sell if for more in 6 months anyways doc, you know that conversation from rolex is probably about right. i heard third hand a question directed to an ex rolex employee about some of the discrepancies on the vintage watches in a hope to clear them up or get some insight. the answer was a frank "look, when we built them no one though there was going to be people scrutinizing them and comparing everything, arguing over tiny details and sequence orders 40 years later. we just built watches. no one thought they would even be around 10 years later" this always makes me laugh when i hear people arguing about tiny things essentially looking for or assuming science where there was none. its all crazy but it doesnt help me get a milsub seeing through it

im jealous that you got to watch kenny play, though when i think about it not so much that id give up my youth to have seen it scotlands taking over in here, pugs in scotland too.....(so counts for this even though hes in disguise) one more and we would need a burns night i do take what you are saying in some sense ref dealers. limited availability makes it hard to get any alternatives to paying the increasing prices seen though i do suspect that wider availability would have only served to prevent such a rapid increase rather than effect final price levels or alter the trend. i saw prices of both watches and parts at the higher end dealers a year ago that made me breath sharply that id bite peoples hands off for now. its hard to gauge all of this though, theres so many variables. what is clear that theres an increasing amount of disposable income about albeit in a narrow circles as the wealth gap increases and an increasing general interest again in the less stale products of yesteryear thats not just limited to watches. ( i make electronica and watched analog synths and drum machines go crazy a few years ago as people moved back after the digital explosion) look at kampfscwimmers, over 100k now and you couldnt shift one 10 years ago for 1k. and theres no parts market and dealer cartels to push this up

this is where you are wrong in some sense. almost all vintage owners these days care about every tiny little detail of accuracy. all you ever hear are debates about if a dial should be in that watch because its a year early, has something been touched up etc etc. there will still be a small portion who have owned theirs a long time or had it passed down but the very large majority of owners are enthusiasts for want of a better word and treat it all very seriously (perhaps a little too much in my mind) they are however generally high end collectors though in some sense even if financial investment varies greatly. its not a cheap and cheerful route into rolex ownership going vintage. its much less expensive and troublefree buying new or new second hand. the fact that rolex changed it out matters not. if it wasnt in there when it was made then it shouldnt be in there now is how it is across the models these days. this is one of the factors for rolex withdrawing support for various vintages. the price of dial and hands and the serious impact of changing and/or damage immasculated them in many ways. most now cant get their watches serviced and of the few that are accepted, less are put through the work due to differences with rolex over what must be left. its ironic that the watches from when rolex really were making tools and less fussy themselves are now the most fussed over and preened there is. the second part of your comment is exactly the case with everything and not just this. its simple economics at work. to think that its simply one or two collectors fueling prices upwards is wrong. anomolous purchases dont force up pricing, there needs to be wide spread market forces acting to do this. its simplistic to think that one or two people with lots of money are causing the increase. this could only happen if they were buying the bulk of the market and this isnt the case with either watches or parts. its luxury goods too ( in the economic sense) which makes matters worse in many ways. i dont think its fair to say that its just people looking to make as much money as they can. this does everyone involved a diservice and is unjust in my opinion. many people will be selling items they previously didnt consider because prices have hit levels which make them reassess the worth to them and people selling parts will be looking for what they can get but thats neither anything new and certainly a large jump to your conclusion thats its a simple triumph of stupidity over common sense.. the ground has just changed dramtically and memories of cheaper prices are forever going to remain that. memories. no one is going to start shifting their watches cheaply just because they bought them for cheap or a long time ago. do i like it, not one bit. why? two reasons. the first is that like you the thought of people holding them as a pure investment is something that is fundamentaly different to my approach to watches. it takes a lot of the fun and personalities out of the hobby and at the same time hides away watches that should be shown off. the second is because theres some watches i want to buy and cant justify at the moment with pricing as it is. this also means that unless my personal circumstances change then i will be unable to ever add them as they arent likely to drop anytime soon. id also like a ferarri and a classic car collection instead of my car but they cost more than i am able to spend. id also like a genuine matisse instead of my print but they same applies. that doesnt make the pricing a triumph of stupidity over common sense in either case in my opinion.

doc, i wasnt suggesting you were living in the past, king kenny had a great game against south africa last night lol just teasing, i know you know how things are and agree its crazy, especially when you look at the world but i guess its just how it is. moaning will do no good and only leave us all without parts. markets drive themselves and this one is only getting worse. grab your parts now while you still can is the only message. southcoast. i am not talking about vintage enthusiasts putting old parts on to make their watches look old or have character. while the rep fora are full of tips to age everything including cases etc, the gen fora dont have any of this. everyone wants mint and authentic but theres just not much mint parts around and period correct is the overriding priority. its the prime directive if you will and prices are only continuing skywards. for collectors, crusty but period correct is better than anything not period correct. even a relume on a gen dial is a no no with very few exceptions since RSC replaced anything less than perfect and for a long time people werent as they are now theres many watches with service replacement hands and dials, bezels and crowns that are often seriously devalued as a result. this along with the perhaps more important fact that everyone now wants their gens to be spec'd as they were when they were made (ie tritium, matte etc etc) has meant that the limited parts available just got a lot smaller. originality is king now and that means beat up is preferred if its all you can get. a beat up watch with original features is worth way more than a mint model with serviced parts. while 5k seems alot for a dial (and is) its relative when the watch is 25k and putting this back in will see your watch jump by almost 15k if thats what it should have had and didnt. heck a milsub dial will push past 20k easy and there will be a queue waiting to grab it from you. 5k wouldnt get you close to genuine milsub sword hands these days and it wasnt so long ago that you could grab a tray of complete watches with decomission papers for $200. 5k is rapidly going to to get you less and less when it comes to authentic vintage parts. 1k will maybe get you NOS tritium sub hands now if you are lucky and i remember baulking at the thought of $150 for a set of lume service replacements. 5k will just and only just get you a 5513 now as prices have more than doubled in less than a year its ironic that spiralling prices of gen parts may be what kills vintage rep enthusiasts and their hobby. perhaps in the not too distant future its going to be easy to tell reps without more than a cursory glance. as all the gens have their service upgrades junked and become all tritium once more and poor ones are parted out, the reps are going to be covered in lume RSC parts which for many are already an expensive luxury. EDITED: to say bugger. pugwash said it much more succinctly below so i'll leave it to him

congrats on the 1000 sadly with prices rocketing, many are trying to push parts that a while ago would have just been scrapped. it doesnt stop people from trying to get the current market price for something thats not worth this, especially when all too often they get it. that being said i wasnt meaning nice aging in my post above either. a crumbling and beat up original period dial is for many far better than anything later period wise regardless of how better the watch looks with this instead and the logic that rolex themselves would change out the parts to keep it looking tip top rather than decrepit. certainly at the moment, thats the attitude amongst vintage enthusiasts

thing is with a DRSD fetching upwards of 25k at the moment and most selling privately for more than that, 5k for a dial is a great buy and a drop in the ocean. a white SD from the same time will cost you about 12k so theres alot held in the red dial there. even a less then pristine one would look like a great purchase at that price if you had your dial replaced at service during the times when people cared less about these things...or sadly by an enthusiastic RSC service tech recently. there may be many personal stories behind prices paid, especially for parts too. i know if i had an SD id be picking something like this up just to hold for an emergency just incase given the watch value and the impact of this investment tied to a gen dial that is very rare to see for sale. that being said, i do agree thats its crazy the way things have gone. i read a comment today on the same that said perhaps everyone who cannot believe these prices is simply living in the past. the days of cheap vintage parts are long gone and everyone needs to get over it. sadly this is fact now. cheap part prices are simply nostalgia these days and bare no relation to the reality of the market whether we like it or not. i wonder how this trend will affect the rep world as even mundane upgrade parts become both difficult to find and costly.

the dial wont be repaired and used but used as is. even a relume devalues the dial. to many, a damaged 100% original dial is worth more than a pristine service dial and both infinately more than any repaired or redial. only vintage redials could be a possible exception to this. you can see this on gen vintage milsub relumes where this is still worth a lot of cash. ive seen people swap out parts of very nice looking watches with less than pristine quality original era parts so that they could have their watch "original". its very common these days as collectors want to have everything just so.

the market is certainly bearing high prices on all things genuine and vintage thats for sure. simple economics would suggest that markets will only bare what buyers are willing to spend and yet the only way ive seen any prices moves is upwards. some of the good guys could be getting even more than they are charging im sure. its getting to the stage that dials and hands will be worth as much or more as the complete watch for some models and we are going to start seeing good watches being parted as they become more valuable that way. its a strange state of affairs thats for sure. i know others are thinking along the same lines too in as much disbelief as myself. there will be a balance soon im sure in some respect though its not going to see prices fall, just settle and remain extremely high. its also going to mean the value of good vintage rolex arent going anywhere but further out of the reaches of most id expect. i kicked myself at biting the bullet and getting on the wagon with my gens later than when i should, only to see them more than double in value already. i now wish i hadnt picked up some more then too ive just watched mutliple sets of 5513 and 1680 tritium hands fly out the door at $700 a set. not one set stuck about for more than a few minutes. my own thought was that at $1000 a set they wouldnt have remained unsold for any longer.

if you could show me where i was being disrespectful that would be great since i cant see any instances and last time i checked, just saying something was so didnt make it thus. it may help me to avoid further tellings off by you in the future which would make all happy i am sure. since we are all here to learn, as you so succinctly stated, it would have been amiss of me to not note that the "expensive " dial was a redial at best and that the foundation of the build was flawed also especially when given the implied thought that this was going to be the mother of all gilts and indestinguishable from the real deal. i could have pointed out issues with the movement for this also but chose not too. if there was as much spent on the dial as implied then perhaps it would arm justasgood with information to get a refund of money he should be due. paying vintage gilt prices for a dial that is essentially worthless save for rep projects due to lack of knowledge isnt fair. increasing understanding by pointing out where things are wrong must surely be better than just blindly suggesting everything is great. keeping quiet, especially out of politeness is just as bad a purposefuly misleading with wrong information and in either no one learns anything to move forward with their hobby. perhaps your post and time would have been better used discussing the technical content of mine rather than puffing your chest and riding to the defence of perceived offended members. if having the authenticity of a part question or pointed out offends members then perhaps this is not the correct hobby for them. while my post wasnt sugar coated, and why should it be, it certainly wasnt rude or unconstructive. i find it rather sad that your outrage is saved only for me and not for the conspiring with a watchmaker to "scam" a customer on a non rolex bezel or some of the other comments in the thread if they are indeed to be believed. do not use my ownership of gen vintage rolex in some backhanded manner to poo poo the validity of my comments either, it shows a distinct lack of maturity and only emphasises the fragility of your reasoning. in some respect owning vintage gens should give some credence to any information i may have within this narrow range and not the contrary. likewise stop using your "choice" to collect multitudes of reps over a single gen as a badge of membership and rank over me or to imply you are in the rep club and i am not. ive thrown away more reps than you mention you have bought and im not even close with most on this forum and see not how it matters in this case. an ability to purchase an item and a passion, love,understanding and technical knolwedge of the same are not related in the least bit whether it be watches, cars or anything else you care to mention. if you simply mention it all the time because you feel inadequate with your lack of a genuine rolex model and feel the need to state that you could have had one but choose to buy ten reps instead then not only am i sure there are other forums where you can discuss this in more depth but you should perhaps rethink your strategy with regards to personal satisfaction. having had a lot of reps, most terrible, enables me to pass comment on their varying quality and comparibility with more and more detail and reference but has not once improved my knowledge with regards to comparison with gen models, parts, workmanship, feel etc. only using and studying genuine models has provided me with this information and ability to compare and even then its restricted only with the very few vintage models i am familiar with.

i hope you didnt pay too much considering its a redial at best. its not that accurate and shouldnt have cost more than $150 at the most and hopefully a lot less. its essentially worthless to all but rep hobbyists but the vintage market being what it is alongside both the lack of any decent rep dials and lack of knowledge amongst many in this sector means there is still a value there albeit small. your watch is also going to have the wrong shaped case for a vintage 5512/5513 using that as a basis too but theres no option really for the reps since they all use the 1680 shape. im not sure i follow your logic ref the value of a gen gilt dial and your outlay unless you are trying to imply that you are going to end up with a quality gilt dial rolex at the end for way less money. hopefully you will have a watch you are happy with and enjoy but its not going to pass much scrutiny and have negligable resale value save parts costs while most importanly of all, will never be a gen. it seemed from the language that you were suggesting you would have one over on the gen community somehow but i hope this was misinterprited. i also personally find the whole MBW bezel tale distasteful to say the least too and rather surprising given the disparity in both finish, quality and operation but hey ho. even the "gens" on ebay are rather far behind the real deal.

do you mean the tube itself or the tube hole on the case? non RSC tubes are made of inferior materials and the threaded piece that screws into the case is shorter too. these combine to make things like stripping much more frequent. gen tubes will rarely strip. just for clarification, there is no such thing as an OEM rolex tube. rolex machine their own tubes which mean that the only OEM tube is a genuine rolex one as they are the Original Equipment Manufacturer. OEM is used commonly on car parts where a company makes parts for use by manufacturers for example. these exact same parts can be bought without the brand name for less money. i guess what is meant is that the are OEM spec but the crucial dropping off of the word spec is misleading. even this is eroneous as they arent made from either the same material or the same spec with respect to the case end if its the case, try retapping and using a gen tube, it will often work. if not get a gen tube and no nail or superglue it in there. dont use a non gen tube as the quality will let you down on the crown threads and you will no be able to get it out without playing with heat

that crown is a 703, its threads are at the top portion iside the crown to accomodate the oring at the base of the 703 tube and the threads above this. 702 crowns have the threaded portion starting from the very opening of the crown as the thread on the corresponding 702 tube is night down next to the case and the sleeve is above these to press agains the inside face of the crown. as such they cant be used on the other tubes, the 703 crown is wider and deeper too hope that made sense

where did you pick it up from and how long ago? sadly thats not a genuine 700 tube though i daresay that if i had the choice of that or going to 703 on my vintage subs id go with that everytime. ive never seen a gen 700 with the splines inside so this is the first give away (they werent introduced until the 702 was released) and that lip at the very top edge isnt like any on a 700 either, the threads go right to the edge. this tube is actually very like a cut down 702. ive seen quite a few non gen rolex issue 702 tubes appearing in recent times, all being passed as new and genuine and wonder if production has moved to the 700 by using these 702 as a base. i did think that it may have been a non RSC issue crown for general watchmakers however it wouldnt explain the splines introduction and so rule this out im afraid too edited to add: the modern and vintage crowns and tubes are not interchangeable. the 703 crown and tube are wider to accomodate the outer O-ring. the 703 crown will just push right over the 700 tube without touching the threads and would do the same on the 701/702 if the extension collar didnt hit the inside face first. the 700,701 and 702 crown/tube combos all share the same thread pitch and dia. thus a 701 or 702 crown will screw onto the 700 tube but will not offer resistance to water as the inside face will not close against the face of the tube. the 700 crown will not fit onto the 701 or 702 tube because of the extension collar there to create the triplock. for those who havent read the other thread, 700 is twinlock crown and tube, used on subs etc until 1971. no outer oring, no dots under coronet on crown 701 is first twinlock, introduced in jan 1972. three dots under coronet on crown to identify. the tube had an extension collar after the threads that pressed far inside the crown and sealed against an O-ring inside. 702 was a revision of the 701 and saw the introduction of splines inside the crown tube to aid fitting. the crown stem portion was thinner to allow it to pass through the narrower opening 703 is the modern triplock and saw the introduction of an O-ring on the tube itself to seal against water ingression. its the modern tube we all all know and see on the modern subs and SDs. as each version was released, it became the standard service replacement used on any RSC visit and so unless owners hold back their crowns and tubes to replace after service, any serviced watch regardless of age will now show a 703 modern triplock if its been into RSC

im not sure you would get enough purchase to turn it with something like that. you should try wrapping electrical tape around your rat tail to protect the inside if you havent got one fine enough. its grippy/rubbery enough it wont slip or chew easily if you use a couple of winds and will work just fine

a rat tail with very fine teeth perhaps or a rubberized one? my own thoughts are that maybe a set of thin soft nosed or rubber tipped pliers would allow it to be tightened a 1/4 turn or so after being finger tightened without damaging threads and sufficiently "nipping" it up to prevent unwanted unscrewing. my instincts are telling me something like this would be used probably as i cant think of anything else really and have never seen anything special. using some rubber gloves to finger tighten it would probably be sufficient as you shouldnt be screwing the crown down hard anyways though whether this would work in practice i couldnt say. i assume this less than perfect solution was what prompted splines being added

im not sure what proper procedure was for fitting these, the documentation certainly doesnt mention anything or a special tool like it does with the 703 triplock. i usually use a rat tail with my twinlocks and it doesnt do any damage if im careful though i certainly dont take them out and in, just once in every few years that an RSC visit is required. i also used the crown itself with one attempt after reading about it being an option to screw it on but found this less satisfactory. its hard to get it tight enough without it backing out at some point when the crown is undone during daily use, normally at the most inconvenient time when tools arent available and the watch sticks hacking. threadlock would solve this issue however ive never seen it on any watch ive ever handled and if rolex dont use it then i am not keen to go sticking it in either. i guess since these were never meant to be replaced and reused, just installed and remaining in place until replacement then things like this were a small issue, though enough to warrant an implementation of splines and a tool. curiously the splines in the tube are far better than the ones in the mouth from an engineering perspective regarding stress and torsion. ive no idea why it was ever changed. maybe the increased tooth depth available by placing them here was of more benefit

daytona is the flashest by far, also look into panerais if you want to get noticed. i always enjoy the irony of seeing people "blinged" up with faux items. big earings made of glass passing as diamond being the most common but watches covered in all sorts are only just behind. surely buying a genuine diamond earing, even if its small must be more inherantly bling than wearing a fake glass one of any size. likewise a genuine watch, regardless of brand must be more bling than wearing a comparably or lower priced fake however with watches i do accept that its less clear cut, many will be unable to tell and thus you can pass yourself off as having something more expensive and as a result more "bling". maybe its just me and i am missing the point somewhere. perhaps the ostentation itself is the most important component and grabbing attention is the whole function. i was stood in a line the other day wearing my 5512 and someone infront had a monstrous watch covered in CZ. i know which stood out more and caught everyones eye and it wasnt mine thats for sure. my own experience is that modern submariners are more obvious than vintage models to the general public. i would always get noticed though mostly just a look or a nod when i wore my modern submariner and never get even a glance when i wear either of my vintage pieces. i did think it was the cyclops that caught peoples attention, its a very rolex characteristic even to non watch enthusiasts however when i changed it for a moderns SD for a short time before getting out of modern altogether the reactions were just the same. i guess the subtle upgrades make the modern variations that bit more flashy and eye catching if still obviously understated.

700 crown and tube were twinlock and fitted up until 1971, crown had no dots, tube had no outer oring. 701 was introduced in 1971 and was first triplock. crown was same shape as twinlock but had three dots under coronet to signify the new extra water protection. tube has no outer O-ring but an extension that continued above the threads and pressed against an O-ring in the crown itself. inside of crown tube had no splines. this was a service retrofit to all twinlocks along side being present on all new models after this date. 702 was introduced as a revision of 701, exact same but crown tube had splines inside to aid fitting (down in the tube where the stem passes, not at the mouth ala the current 703) and crown stem piece was thinner to allow it to fit through the narrow crown tube opening. again would have been a service retrofit to any models with older crowns and used on all models after release. 703 is the modern triplock we see these days with an outer O-ring on the crown tube and a fatter, squarer crown to accomodate. this is the current service replacement from rolex along with being present on all new models ive got the rolex documents for the change up to 701 from 700 somewhere detailing changes and release date etc. i might try and dig them out. its hard to gauge by looking at older models as crowns wear and are often replaced meaning that many serviced SD and subs will have modern triplocks on them unless at some point the owners started holding the originals back to replace after service (i do with my twinlocks). also with the vintage boom, many owners have pushed for originality and retrofitted old crowns without understanding the dates and what should be on their watch. ive got sets of all variations in my parts bin. maybe i should take pics and post them up. it seemed too anal to do before

i just used a small bit in a dremel though cant speak for anyone else. im sure a better job could be done with a proper engraving tool, they feel easier to handle however since it was a one off job i didnt feel the cost was worth it for me. the fact that i was just outlining an already present pattern and the point was that it was meant to be worn also swung it. i found working the back after the engraving with sandpaper etc was as important for wearing the caseback in

ive got a rolex issued technical sheet showing all the configurations for bracelet and end links that i'll try and dig out. it shows alot more configurations were used on many models than on that list but im not sure with direct ref to the 1665 as with not having one i never paid much attention. definately on the divers extension on the 9315 and 93150. it sounds like more a fault with the rep bracelets with regards to accuracy than their being options for no extension

great job without a doubt. the movement is to die for. im feeling the 3646 somehow more but that takes nothing away from this. maybe with the new dial it will give it the extra zip the 3646 has over it just now. the strap is great too, just want id come to expect from you youre getting quite a tasty collection over there now how did you get on mating the cortebert stem with the crown?

absolutely fantastic. im super jealous. the whole feel is just right some how. its hard to explain but this is pressing all my buttons loving the strap too. did you vintagize the stiching after youd sewn it? one of the nicest efforts ive seen and i look at pics of gens of these daily while drooling and dreaming. you just need to pick up a compass to wear on your other wrist