Jump to content
When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.
  • Current Donation Goals

Doubt about 1665 bevel / chamfers


Dan71

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

I was checking the 1665 jkf and seem to me that the bevel / chamfers are not correct .

pic from supermirror

601bd61aa703eefcbb9dda41b7ba3ad6.jpg&key=cc93fc2352d7be3965c5eec61817f6c4044bcaefd16d9bc4c10cb00e277cf635

 

I read that the gen bevel/chamfers was less noticeable than the 5513 and 1680, but on the jkf they are totally absent..

Seem the jkf have a case of the latter modern rlx .

 

Below a nos gen 1665 bevel (pic from forum Orologi&passioni)

 

fec26f411cd5abeee5d9d00981d5fc07.jpg&key=1192b90e87559d6049d4115fcacb7d2b240a9d08c8d545a60a69544657b66f68

fca42daa477e7b0c6648287f9cd313a2.jpg&key=e1e2f27d859f961df805847d61ad0407b681fe11550490303b25b04d9354e287

 

Maybe I’m wrong but if you can give me your opinion .

 

Tks

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bevels in your photos are more pronounced than others I've seen.  In some genuine watches the bevels are almost non-existent.  A couple of the lugs on mine are worn to look almost as big as your pictures, but other lugs are much smaller.  Look at my first picture, left lug vs. right lug.  The left one hits things more often than the right so it's worn more.  The right lug bevel is very small.

 

Sure it's possible to create bevels like those with hand tools.  I'd recommend a good set of diamond jeweler's files. 

 

Remember, these were the hard working tool watches so luscious shaped bevels weren't that important.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok well note you are a guru ;-)

but despite that I’m not full convinced because if I looking for on chrono24 almost all the 1665 have bevel like my pics above ..

 

Diamond jeweler file :/ isn’t enough a nail file ?

 

e6045320139c23e722e7d9d4ed9f2f78.jpg&key=3b763a9d41bb4be2dd0b0c01b1565a4b03673e98126cc0c203748e1f113b51d7

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Dan71 said:

Ok well note you are a guru ;-)

but despite that I’m not full convinced because if I looking for on chrono24 almost all the 1665 have bevel like my pics above ..

 

Diamond jeweler file :/ isn’t enough a nail file ?

 

e6045320139c23e722e7d9d4ed9f2f78.jpg&key=3b763a9d41bb4be2dd0b0c01b1565a4b03673e98126cc0c203748e1f113b51d7

 

No nail files files are no good!

Edited by SuperDanX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi
 
I was checking the 1665 jkf and seem to me that the bevel / chamfers are not correct .
pic from supermirror
601bd61aa703eefcbb9dda41b7ba3ad6.jpg&key=cc93fc2352d7be3965c5eec61817f6c4044bcaefd16d9bc4c10cb00e277cf635
 
I read that the gen bevel/chamfers was less noticeable than the 5513 and 1680, but on the jkf they are totally absent..
Seem the jkf have a case of the latter modern rlx .
 
Below a nos gen 1665 bevel (pic from forum Orologi&passioni)
 
fec26f411cd5abeee5d9d00981d5fc07.jpg&key=1192b90e87559d6049d4115fcacb7d2b240a9d08c8d545a60a69544657b66f68
fca42daa477e7b0c6648287f9cd313a2.jpg&key=e1e2f27d859f961df805847d61ad0407b681fe11550490303b25b04d9354e287
 
Maybe I’m wrong but if you can give me your opinion .
 
Tks
 
 
 
 
 
 
So this a old MBW for comparison.769a2626b2626818a5218dfec49aa968.jpg

Gesendet von meinem MI 4S mit Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can go to a search site, (Bing for example), type in 'rolex 1665' and look at dozens of examples with lug bevels of all types and find all kinds of variations. 

Lug bevels are hard to do by hand because after you work 2 or 3 hours on one and finally get it right...you still have 3 more to go, and they all need to be the same.

 

Something I have noticed is when bevels are filed/ground/polished on lugs, the lugs often end up looking too thin from the top side and there is no fix for that.  Bevels also make the spring bar holes appear to be closer to the top edge of the lug and this can look pretty bad sometimes.  The bevel shape and condition also needs to match the overall condition of the watch.

It looks like the JKF 1665 has plenty of metal to work with compared to many others.

 

Lug tops are much like crown guards, you have to be very careful or you will mess the case up...and with lug tops you have 4 chances to screw up, not just one. 

 

I have tried making/improving bevels on numerous cases and some turned out Ok and some did not.  Exercising restraint seems to be the way to go.  When using sandpaper to form bevels, a flexible backing on the sandpaper can result in rounded edges on the bevels that do not look right and are not easy to fix.

 

 

"The bevels in your photos are more pronounced than others I've seen.  In some genuine watches the bevels are almost non-existent."

 

I've noticed this too.  If there is this much variation in genuine examples, I would say a replica can get away with just about anything within reason.  Anyway, that's a good excuse to leave the CG alone on my MBK cases.

Some of the most consistent bevels on my cases are on the old 5513/1680 cases from 'Paul' at Abay.  The cases have flaws of course but this detail was fairly well done back then (early 2000s). 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhhhh you touched on CGs. There's where all the case sets get it wrong... a gen 1665 has very unique crown guards and the ones we get aftermarket are always modeled after a 1680.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nanuq , a nos like this is a good example of correct bevel? (See link and pic below)
Do you think that is possible replicate with manual tools at home these little
bevel ?
 
https://oredelmondo.org/products/rolex-ref-1665-nos-sea-dweller-double-red-line-mid-70s-sold-in-japan-full-set
 
ab29a6d0279f2b171e18616b1d26ff79.jpg&key=ce4eb0ed13dbd6ecef3ea8de368bd8c433af548f260bde5deb589e6fd1101001
 
There are a lot of variations for the bezel and also for the CG's.
I think it's also a question of taste.

This is mine.b41ed169cc0984f174b354acfd3748da.jpg

Gesendet von meinem MI 4S mit Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up