Strange 16660 on VRF

[FxrAndy]

Why would a 16660 have a 702 crown fitted????

http://www.network54.com/Forum/207673/message/1339704932/FS-+Rolex+transitional+sea-dweller+ref-+16660+with+matte+dial+and+bonus+caseback

i thought that 703s were fitted before the 1665 series ended

[freddy333]

Yes, they were fitted with 703s & that is a bit odd. But without a full-frontal of the crown & side view of the tube (with crown in the time-setting position), I cannot say for sure that that is not an early version 703 (I have never seen definitive evidence of where the cut-off between wrapped & solid crowns began).

Here are a couple more known-gen 16660s with what appear to be the same crown

[bruce79]

I dunno, that looks a lot like a 702 in the VRF ad. The 702 fetches far more than the 703 so I suppose it could be considered a bonus. I'm no crown expert tho.

[alligoat]

I'm not sure exactly when Rolex switched to the 703 crown, but I'd bet the crown on that SD is a 703.

The crown in Freddy's second pic is definitely a 703- remember the 702 tube didn't have an external gasket. And 702s and 703s are in no way compatible- change out the crown and you're changing out the tube.

I've seen an early 16800 with a 702 crown and tube and I've seen late 1665s (1982-3) which still had the 702 assembly.

Did early 16800s and 16660s come with 702 assemblies? I just don't know, but it wouldn't surprise me.

[FxrAndy]

Yep nothing with vintage rolex us supprising. But the chamfer on the one on vrf looks bigger than on a 703 to me