zaza

I think the 77/78 era was a 702 crown and tube. Page 157 in "Rolex Daytona-a legend is born" refers to a 701 triplock crown in 1972 and by 1977 it refers to a 702 crown. Around 1982 a 703 is used. Prior to 1972 would have been the 700 twinlock. This is all on pages 156-159 of the book.

CONCISE yet VERY INFORMATIVE.

Thanks for sharing the knowledge Al. I think this two liner of yours will remove all ambiguity about this confusing subject  

Any updates on the proyect?

and SOLD! lol

Noooooo - you've ordered the watch. Now is not the time to discuss rep accuracy. Those sort of questions are asked before ordering watches. +1 He's right. The watch is ordered already. QC pics serve only to verify that it's the exact watch you saw on the dealer's website, beside time keeping test. Else, no dealer would be able to sell a piece, as 98% of reps have faults in them. The watch is beautiful. You can ask a watch smith on the forums to fix little imperfections, which is the fun part of this hobby anyway Sent from my  Typøs are courtesy of iPhone Autocorrect

Quoting another post and editing that post is showing some errors +1 Sent from my  Typøs are courtesy of iPhone Autocorrect

Not sure if its gen or not but I know that whoever lume that sucker had to be drunk, nick all over the markers and looks kind of lumpy in some spots.

But why is the "S" in Swiss hiding under the Baton? How could this even happen..

I offered him $600 and he took it immediately! Then I was closely examining it.. when I began to discover all these faults..

I'm retracting my offer.. I don't feel comfortable with this..

Thank you gentlemen!

Not a rolex expert by any means however why would the marker cover the SWISS T<25? Also Should the crown be directly abouve the L in ROLEX?

Yep! That was exactly my point.. 

Also, why are the hour rims touching the rail?! It's so weird.. I wonder if the Seller is aware of these faults.. 

and doesn't that font color seem too fresh and white to be from the 80s? 

those surrounds look awfully thick for a genuine. Rolex white gold is thinner and more refined, i would say it's not genuine, at least the hour indices aren't. Also there's something wonky about the SWISS T<25 ?

You're right Pam.. the markers rims are bulkier than average.. It doesn't look quite genuine to me..

A power seller on eBay with 100% feedback is offering the following "Original" 16660 ROLEX Dial for sale: Item no. 140890572101

Do you guys think this is normal? Follow the Arrows.

inputs are quite appreciated!

The 5514 Prototype 2.0

Prolly the SEXIEST term I've heard on the forums of late!

Sent from my 

Typøs are courtesy of iPhone Autocorrect

the story goes.....sigma dials came with white gold baton markers/ hand sets..........in 1975, for only that year they also came with the red daytona script above the hour sub dial.....but i really don't know much about rolex watches so an expert would need to chime in.....LOL

Thanks for the historical overview J

I'm fascinated by your hard work and dedication. Are you really taking offers on this babe?

Btw, another esteemed member has just listed his Über Frankėn 6263 for sale. Offered at +$6,000 the watch is not as LOADED as yours, but it's nothing short of fabulous!

Link: http://www.rwg.cc/index.php?/topic/152519-FS:-6263

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

Wow!! I would rather get the best available dial. $1,250 for something no one will see!!!

I have to agree with you.. You can get yourself a handsome dial for that amount. But you need to act fast. Prices are becoming ridiculous..

Mine has cost me $1,600 (it's a rare MK1 with patina). A week later the dealer I got it from offered me $2k for it. I had to resist..

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

You can buy a whole MBW case for the price of Phong CB. I know a member who has a whole MBW case for sale, but he's asking $450

And there is a GENUINE 1665 case back in the possession of a dealer of mine, he's asking $1,250

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

Fabulous build indeed!

I have a question: so what's the difference between this dial and the one with DAYTONA WRITTEN IN RED ABOVE THE 6 O'CLOCK Register?

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

Lol you guys are hilarious.

So tell us Janeto, what was the aggregate cost of your project? I guess Lots of members here would be interested in knowing, before they venture into something they can't afford and stuck in the middle.

I've seen many people throw their parts back on sale after failing to meet the budget..

A breakdown would be quite appreciated

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

RG disgusts me.

Pathetic web interface, retarded moderators with sickening attitude, and it's full of scammers.

You're better off here trust me. RWG is the best!

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

I like the idea of buying an inexpensive Airking and converting it into an Explorer.

Lol, EXACTLY!

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

How about fitting a 127 fiddy superdome in a Silix 3646? Does anyone know if it will fit?

Sent from my  using Tapatalk

Obviously you can't judge or compare a vintage with a new SD insert. I didn't realize from your first post that it was supposedly forty years old. If I was purchasing it, I'd still be concerned about the numbers not being centered though. It would bother me even if it was gen.

Thank you K,

haven't pulled the trigger on it yet. I thought to consult with Gurus of RWG first.

I also don't want to fall victim of the common psychological trap when sometimes you really want to convince yourself it's a Gen. piece. I'm pretty sure you' getting my drift

Wait! just noticed that the distance between "1" and "0" of the "10" marker is actually wider on the insert in Question. Could this be of any significance?

The only thing I have been able to pick out between the gen and aftermarket inserts, is this. If you start at the pearl, going to the right, you have minute markers to the fifteen minute mark. The one thing I have noticed is the 9 minute marker is closer to the 10 on the rep, than on the gen. This one looks to close. Thats my 2 cents

Thank you Matt. I've run a quick image search on google and tried to apply your observation on a few Genuine SD inserts, and have come to the conclusion that many of them do actually share the same trait: a 9th minute marker that's pretty close to Number 10, and yet they're sold as Genuine (Kindly refer to some pictures I've attached for Ref.)

I'm not saying it's not gen but it doesn't look much like the gen insert on my SD. The pearl's too small and the numbers and the stick bars aren't centered on the insert. Nor does the printing look as crisp, particularly the 5.

Thank you K! It looks like there are indeed many versions of the insert. Also, since the 5512, 5513 and 1680 Genuine inserts do in fact fit a SD 1665, we don't seem to know which is which.. Is it safe to assume that even Rolex doesn't have a certain standard in this regard? I've noticed pearls in different sizes as well, and the numbers/sticks are not always centered to the insert. About crispiness of the print, maybe.. and yet it's a 40 year old print (supposedly). Maybe it's supposed to look this way..

I'm going nuts really, much less frustrated. Actually, I'm beginning to believe that this whole Vintage Rolex trade is nothing but a con job.. Else, how come these very "rare" parts and components are mushrooming like that.. They seem to be everywhere, all labelled as Genuine..

I could tell if there was a pic of the bottom of it.

Thank you Super, Thank you Alli,

Here is another picture as requested:

The numbers seem too close to the outer rim.. Is this OK? I'm buying this for my 1665 SD build.

Thank you

It's offered to me as a Gen. Sea Dweller insert. Seller seems honest, but extra opinion is quite appreciated. Rolex connoisseurs please advise. Many thanks!

It's BK's version

You can look up his listings under BK garage section on this forum.

Good luck