TeeJay

I wish I could tell you, but I have absolutely no idea as I've never measured the watch's dimensions. All I can tell you, is that I've fitted a 28mm dial with no issue, and the watch doesn't flood if I go swimming or have a shower Indeed I do Nothing spectacular, but I like it

I used one of these 5513s for a Tudor build and am very happy with the result

+1 No replica vintage model available from a dealer will look real upon arrival (ie looking 20+ years old) they will all require modification work to artificially age the watch which will involve taking the watch to pieces. Of course, more modern watches, like the DateJust, 16610 Submariner, etc, would all be fine upon arrival, and only require a little scouring to take away that pristine newness and make the watch appear a bit worn, rather than 'out of the shop brand new'. Seeing such a brand new Rolex, will be more likely to get noticed than something older, which 'flys under the radar'

I believe that the modern Rolex watches with ROLEXROLEXROLEX engraved round the dial have a serial number at the 6 o clock position. How does replica handle this? They all have the same serial number. The chances of a casual observer actually knowing a Rolex serial number is probably less than being struck by lightning Yes, many dealers sell replicas of the vintage watches. But. They do not look old, ie covered in scuffs and scratches. The details are mostly correct, but the watch looks as new as the original would have looked when first purchased in the 60s/70s, rather than looking like something purchased in the 60s/70s and then worn daily till the present day. Of course, it is possible to artificially age a watch using various methods such as staining or cooking the dial and hands, and scuffing up the case and bracelet with a scouring pad to achieve an aged look For me, it's not so much a case of preferring the vintage to make it look more like the genuine watch, just to make the watch draw less attention than a shiny new one

There's only one way to find out...

My Christmas wristie: The fat-strap was a christmas present from my mother in law, and will be worn on a Newman project in the future, but for now, and so as not to offend MIL, it's hosting the 1655, Orlando Bloom-style. I'm thinking he might be onto something, a fat-strap almost makes the watch likeable The H3 Tactical, was from the ever generous FXRAndy Happy Christmas, amigos :drinks:

Fairly typical answer here, in that PAMs took a while to grow on me. The first time I wore one, I wasn't really impressed, but for some reason, I was tempted to order another, and really liked it. I'd have to agree with the comment about collections coming full circle, as I'm now back wearing Rolex and Tudor (albeit vintage, rather than modern) and my first rep was indeed a 16610, which after the initial buyer's buzz wore off, started to bore me pretty quickly, which opened the way for Omegas, and the rest is history

Thanks for the comparison shots, and indeed, the 1680 certainly looks like a suitable base to work from Really looking forward to seeing another snowflake on the forum

You're very welcome It may take a little getting used to the curved back, but they really are a treat to wear (especially with the more modern-style bracelet )

Very tasty Those 5513 cases really are comfy on the wrist, aren't they

+1 I agree entirely. Again, I agree entirely. I would also like to say that when those folks who are screaming fake have to make the decision between a: sullying their precious watch with 'fake' parts or b: admiring their non-working paperweight, they're going to deserve a big: for their snooty attitudes

First off, welcome to the party Secondly, any Submariner has the potential of getting spotted as a fake, simply because it says 'Rolex' on the dial. Even if the watch is visually perfect, or even genuine original, having the R Word on the dial, is always risking the question "Is that a Real Rolex?" However, in day to day life, I've found watches really don't get commented on very much, so the risk of actually getting called out is very slim, if not non-existent. The above listed watch does look really nice, and I bet if any non-watch enthusiast was to handle it in person, the weight and feel would most likely make them think that it was real. Personally, I prefer the more vintage Submariners, for aesthetic reasons, but, in terms of being called out, someone is much less likely to notice (and then question) an apparently aged and beaten up watch, than they are a modern and shiny watch which looks brand new... Of course, there's something for everyone in this hobby, and I'm sure you'll receive many more answers which will help you to find precisely the watch for you

The very first Rolex watch which is now known as a Submariner, the 6200, only had Rolex Oyster Perpetual on the dial, it wasn't branded the Submariner for a little while... The bubblebacks, again, were only branded Rolex Oyster Perpetual. WIth the above listed watch, my gut says -D-... Case is Explorer-esque, hands from a DateJust, and the dial, again, Explorer-esque, but I wouldn't like to say. Possibly a pre-Explorer dial, possibly a faux-vintage project built by someone (like me ) who just wanted to have their own custom Rolex, and built it to look period specific to avoid the recognition of a shiny new watch (the end of the bracelet, the endlinks, and condition of the bezel and lugs makes me suspect a modern build) Either way, very tasty

Ahh, I see the problem... Might manufacturing a new retaining spring from higher gauge wire be a possibility? JMB can do wonders with stainless, I'm sure he could work out something to fix things

How much too big is the bezel? If you were to wrap dental floss between the bezel and mid-case, might that 'take up the slack' enough for it to fit securely?

I'm wondering if it might be a modified pocket watch?

Still not taking things too seriously here, just a quick His n Hers shot. Emily's watch has been modded to include lume on the hands and markers (stock was just white paint ) and a submariner dial marker replacing the stock pearl which had the same luminous qualities as the original 'lume' job

Happy birthday, bro, you've always bought energy and excitement to the forum, and the party's never dull when you're around

Good to see you posting, I hope life's been treating you well

Not taking things too seriously today...

Interesting, as it reduces the accuracy of the display, yet I really like it

I believe that the watch is a standard 16610 Submariner with a Corvus Bond strap fitted (aftermarket purchase rather than bought 'as is') [Edit to add] Following Dizzy's comment, I'd just like to clarify that I was referring to the overall model of the watch, not the factory of origin of this specific watch

Absolutely beautiful watch, and those hands make so much difference to the impact of the watch, it's incredible

This thread caught my eye as my Tudor sub is a 7909 dial in a 5513 case

Here's a fresh pic of the usual