speedy1 Posted October 26, 2006 Report Share Posted October 26, 2006 Yes, most people would rather keep the triplock rolex crown. But in lengthy discussions about vintage Tudors with a local jewler who specializes in selling and servicing "preowned Rolexes and Tudors" I was told that yes they did come with Rollie triplocks initally but if they had been serviced at the Rolex/Tudor factory sometime in the last 10-15 years then the crown would probably have been changed to a Tudor triplock of the same dimension as the vintage triplock crown. He even pulled his personal Tudor Sub out to show me. But, he also said many tudor owners weren't happy about this but most did not care. He said that they had changed out a couple of the tudor crowns that had gotten "dinged" with modern Rolex Triplock crowns but it did not look right as they are a good 1mm larger that the vintage depth wise. Well, I couldn't find a whole lot of evidence of his statments on the web as most people don't get their Tudors actually serviced by Rolex. So he could have been full of crap. But there are VERY few experts and or info on vintage Tudor subs out there so he may be dead right too. But I did notice that my triplock crown was obviously larger than the pics of the Tudors I had seen. So I went back and asked him if they kept and of the tudor replacment crowns. Smilling (and knowing that I like reps as well as gens) he stated he "knew I would be back to ask that" I trimmed crowngaurds, and installed new tube and crown, plus gen tropic, drilled and beveled lug holes, and finished by polishing the ever-lovin-crap out of the whole case and refinishing the brushed finish. Visiually it doesn't make a HUGE difference but the watch lines FEEL much softer and the straight lines and edges have that refinished a bit look to them. But most of all all the flat areas aren't perfectly flat any more and have jjjuuuussssttttt a bit or roundness to them. And voila! I took it back to show him my "homage" watch and watched his eyes bug. In his own words...."Even in hand, I wouldn't question the authenticity of that watch" After he new, he said that the finish on the hand lume was questionable but otherwise it is as perfect as he could imagine it being. So, without further hesitation..... the reference pic for the cg and crown size (note that the crown in the pic is not fully screwed down so one must account for that in measuring crown to CG size relation) the finished product a closer view and a straight on shot Would YOU call this out if you saw it on my wrist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWG Technical Posted October 26, 2006 Report Share Posted October 26, 2006 Wonderful story and fantastic work on the watch...amazing... Here is a genuine one if you want to compare, 1979 model I restored...looks damm fine to me... If you need more genuine pics let me know... RG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 26, 2006 Report Share Posted October 26, 2006 GREAT job! You read the review I wrote of this watch, didn't you? http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=12382 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy1 Posted October 27, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2006 GREAT job! You read the review I wrote of this watch, didn't you? http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=12382 Hell yeah I did By-Tor! Your damn review gave me the fever for this damn watch! I love you and hate you at the same time for putting the idea for it in my head! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 27, 2006 Report Share Posted October 27, 2006 Thanks (I guess). PS: Here's the genuine model that you should compare your watch to (Ziggy posted a pic of the date model) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted October 27, 2006 Report Share Posted October 27, 2006 Yep, Speedy, I'd call you out if I saw that watch. I'd say, "Nice Tudor!" But help me out here. Is this a rep, or should I say Frankenwatch? Did you start out w/ a dial, hands, and case (MBW?) and build a Tudor sub? I'd love to know more. BTW, the cg's and crown look great, I'm with you and prefer the smaller vintage crowns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy1 Posted October 27, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2006 (edited) Yep, Speedy, I'd call you out if I saw that watch. I'd say, "Nice Tudor!" But help me out here. Is this a rep, or should I say Frankenwatch? Did you start out w/ a dial, hands, and case (MBW?) and build a Tudor sub? I'd love to know more. BTW, the cg's and crown look great, I'm with you and prefer the smaller vintage crowns. I don't know how it started out actually. I got it from a fellow Darkside member who bought it and never did anything with it but manage to put a nice big crack in th e crystal. So after a couple months, I got a crystal for it I decided to give it a go for building. I have built quite a few vintage Pannies to date but never a Tudor. And after By-Tor posted his thread I thought "helllll yeah, I need to build this watch!) I think it must have started off life as a watchmaster. Edited October 27, 2006 by speedy1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alligoat Posted October 27, 2006 Report Share Posted October 27, 2006 OK, I kinda figured WM/MBW case, one, because of the bezel pearl, and two, that's the only case that I figured a gen dial would fit in. I would assume that the old Tudors were the same case/dial sizes as the 5513/1680 subs, around 38.5mm as opposed to the 16800/16610 cases at closer to 40mm. And you're talking plastic crystal, not sapphire. A Frankenwatch! Perfect for Halloween! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubiquitous Posted October 27, 2006 Report Share Posted October 27, 2006 Very nice, Speedy! I love it! Excellent job on those CG's! For reference sake... 7928's would have come with the coronet signed Triplock (or Twinlock for the older variants), as they are of the older vintage (1950's to 1970's). A 94010 like yours is a bit later in production (1970's - 1980's), and would have come with the shield signed Triplock, so in my opinion, that is correct. I love the vintage Tudors... I regret letting my old frankenstein 7928 go... I keep telling myself that if it ever surfaced for sale, I'd buy it back... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy1 Posted October 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2006 Well we will see how much farther I can get on it before I loose intrest and move on to another project. Outwardly this thing looks kick ass. The current eta movement looks ok. I ended up getting two, no date, rep tudor movements. And can't decide if I want to go ahead and drop one of them in this watch or keep the eta that came in it. It keeps time great and hasn't hiccuped once since getting it all together and putting it on the winder. I also have a chance to buy a genuine tudor movment, but the fellow wants $500 USD. And to be frank, after they are cleaned, the rep movments look good and keep good time. @Ubiquitos I will tell you this though. I have been sitting back more and more, and thinking of your daytona. I REALLY think I am going to liquidate of few of my watches are start building a Daytona. My watch smith says he can build a spacer to make a genuine el primero fit any case as long as it isn't too small to begin with. I just have to find out if a rep dial spacing will fit an el primero movement. Anyone want to trade a Tudor for a black face daytona ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertk Posted October 28, 2006 Report Share Posted October 28, 2006 Great work. it's a real achievement to get it that good. here's one from the early days: On my uncle's wrist, now gonna be on mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.