SD 1665 Crown Tube

[bertieng]

Any Rollie expert got the idea what is the ref. # of the tube used in the original SD1665? Or is it the same as the 24-7030? I believe the original Trilock crown on the 1665 didn't have the 3 dots under the cornet, am I correct?

Thanks.

[alligoat]

Early subs had the 24-700 series crown and tube- no dots under the crown. These were on subs from the 60's into the 70's. The 24-702 series crown and tube came out in the middle 70's- two gaskets on the inside of the tube, one in the crown- nothing on the outside of the tube, three dots on the crown- the early triplock assembly. Somewhere around 1980, the current version, 24-703 assembly came out. It had the added outside gasket on the tube, three dots and is the current assembly still in use to this day.

As for the 1665, I'm thinking it originally came w/ the 24-702 series crown and tube and would have the three dots on the crown since it dates from the mid 70's. Might check www.doubleredseadweller.com and see if they have the information.

I would think it would be hard to get the depth rating w/ the original style 24-700 assembly.

[drop]

Yes, just to add there's actually a very good summary of this (with pics) over in the Timezone forums... I the link is posted somewhere on this board.

As I recall from that post, the earliest SD actually had a twinlock with no dots under the crown. The 24-702 triplock came next (no o-ring) and then came the 24-703.

The 24-7020 tubes are pretty tough to find.

[alligoat]

Looking at Skeet and Urul, it looks like the earliest SRSD had a twinlock crown and tube, and it would stand to reason that the first DRSD's also probably had the twinlock. I'm also thinking the 24-702 assembly dates from the late 60's or very early 70's, because all of the SD's after 67 they show have the three dot triplock crown.

I agree w/ drop, in that finding either a 24-7000 or a 24-7020 tube would be tough. And certainly a 24-703 update on any early Rolex is OK- the SC's would do it.

[thewightstuff]

700 crown and tube were twinlock and fitted up until 1971, crown had no dots, tube had no outer oring.

701 was introduced in 1971 and was first triplock. crown was same shape as twinlock but had three dots under coronet to signify the new extra water protection. tube has no outer O-ring but an extension that continued above the threads and pressed against an O-ring in the crown itself. inside of crown tube had no splines. this was a service retrofit to all twinlocks along side being present on all new models after this date.

702 was introduced as a revision of 701, exact same but crown tube had splines inside to aid fitting (down in the tube where the stem passes, not at the mouth ala the current 703) and crown stem piece was thinner to allow it to fit through the narrow crown tube opening. again would have been a service retrofit to any models with older crowns and used on all models after release.

703 is the modern triplock we see these days with an outer O-ring on the crown tube and a fatter, squarer crown to accomodate. this is the current service replacement from rolex along with being present on all new models

ive got the rolex documents for the change up to 701 from 700 somewhere detailing changes and release date etc. i might try and dig them out. its hard to gauge by looking at older models as crowns wear and are often replaced meaning that many serviced SD and subs will have modern triplocks on them unless at some point the owners started holding the originals back to replace after service (i do with my twinlocks). also with the vintage boom, many owners have pushed for originality and retrofitted old crowns without understanding the dates and what should be on their watch.

ive got sets of all variations in my parts bin. maybe i should take pics and post them up. it seemed too anal to do before

Edited August 15, 2007 by thewightstuff

[alligoat]

Interesting, wight. I wasn't aware of the 701 assembly- but w/o any inside splines in the tube, it must have been a trick to assemble. I can see where it would be replaced by the 702.

[freddy333]

701 was introduced in 1971 and was first triplock. crown was same shape as twinlock but had three dots under coronet to signify the new extra water protection. tube has no outer O-ring but an extension that continued above the threads and pressed against an O-ring in the crown itself. inside of crown tube had no splines. this was a service retrofit to all twinlocks along side being present on all new models after this date.

Just wondering if there was a special tool or procedure Rolex used to remove & install these splineless tubes? I have both of the standard Rolex tube tools--1 for spines around the opening of the tube (new style) and 1 for splines around the inside of the tube (old style), but neither tool works with these splineless tubes (either the tool just spins freely inside the tube or it does not fit into the hole in the tube).

I have to fit a couple of splineless 6mm Twinlocks and I would rather not have to choose between scratching/damaging the inside of the tube or relying on glue as the only options for keeping the tube in the case. I know we have all come up with different methods for R&Ring tubes (rat tail file, hex driver, etc.), but all of these run the risk of damaging the inside of the tube. I am sure RSC did not remove & install these tubes this way. They must have had a better way to do it. Is there any reference to the required tool or procedure in your documentation?

[thewightstuff]

im not sure what proper procedure was for fitting these, the documentation certainly doesnt mention anything or a special tool like it does with the 703 triplock. i usually use a rat tail with my twinlocks and it doesnt do any damage if im careful though i certainly dont take them out and in, just once in every few years that an RSC visit is required. i also used the crown itself with one attempt after reading about it being an option to screw it on but found this less satisfactory. its hard to get it tight enough without it backing out at some point when the crown is undone during daily use, normally at the most inconvenient time when tools arent available and the watch sticks hacking. threadlock would solve this issue however ive never seen it on any watch ive ever handled and if rolex dont use it then i am not keen to go sticking it in either.

i guess since these were never meant to be replaced and reused, just installed and remaining in place until replacement then things like this were a small issue, though enough to warrant an implementation of splines and a tool.

curiously the splines in the tube are far better than the ones in the mouth from an engineering perspective regarding stress and torsion. ive no idea why it was ever changed. maybe the increased tooth depth available by placing them here was of more benefit

Edited August 15, 2007 by thewightstuff

[freddy333]

TWS -- I agree with you about the problems with using a crown to install the tube. You cannot really screw the tube down properly with a crown, because either the crown will bottom on the case before the tube is fully tightened, or the tube will partly (or fully) unscrew when you unscrew the crown. And although I have been able to install a couple of Twinlocks with a rat tail file, the file has gouged (damaged) the inside of both tubes. So there has got to be a better way to install these splineless tubes since Rolex QC would never allow a watch to leave their premises with a damaged tube.

Anyone else have any info on this?

[thewightstuff]

a rat tail with very fine teeth perhaps or a rubberized one?

my own thoughts are that maybe a set of thin soft nosed or rubber tipped pliers would allow it to be tightened a 1/4 turn or so after being finger tightened without damaging threads and sufficiently "nipping" it up to prevent unwanted unscrewing.

my instincts are telling me something like this would be used probably as i cant think of anything else really and have never seen anything special. using some rubber gloves to finger tighten it would probably be sufficient as you shouldnt be screwing the crown down hard anyways though whether this would work in practice i couldnt say.

i assume this less than perfect solution was what prompted splines being added

[freddy333]

You just gave me an idea -- A small tool like a micrometer that has expanding jaws used to measure the inside diameter of a cylinder or tube would do the trick. You would slide the jaws inside the tube, expand them until they press firmly against the inside walls of the tube and then screw the tube into the case. Once installed, you just collapse the jaws and remove the tool. If such a tool exists, that would do the trick perfectly.

Now does anyone know of a source for such a device?

[thewightstuff]

im not sure you would get enough purchase to turn it with something like that.

you should try wrapping electrical tape around your rat tail to protect the inside if you havent got one fine enough. its grippy/rubbery enough it wont slip or chew easily if you use a couple of winds and will work just fine

[polexpete]

Hey guys,

had that problem when i installed the same tube in my red sub. You gotta have extremely clean threads so you can screw the tube down all the way with just your fingers. Use the CORRECT rolex tap to clean the case threads. Once this is done you should be okay. No way should you use any tools to insert the tube or you'll damage it they're quite delicate. I then used Epoxy 330, a molecular connecter used for glueing metal, glass etc and let it harden under a heat lamp then left it 24 hours before screwing a crown on it. Works perfect, tested the case and its swim proof but wouldn't put it under pressure, ie diving. Hope this helps.

Cheers

P.

[freddy333]

I thought of using epoxy, but what do you do when you need to replace the tube the next time?

I still have to wonder what Rolex uses when they fit one of these splineless tubes? There must be a tool for that.

[drop]

ive got sets of all variations in my parts bin. maybe i should take pics and post them up. it seemed too anal to do before

I don't think that'd be too anal

Very interesting thread, thanks gents. I just bought this crown which didn't have a totally clear description - I'm pretty sure it's a 703 but as long as so many pros are looking would you mind confirming? I need to get the tube and want to be totally certain I'm hunting the right part.

Cheers!

[polexpete]

Hey Drop,

no this is the wrong crown check out this topic http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showto...0sub&st=20I on page 2 there is a pic of the crown you want. But the tubes are really hard to find.

P.

[polexpete]

Hey Drop,

no this is the wrong crown check out this topic http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showto...0sub&st=20I on page 2 there is a pic of the crown you want. But the tubes are really hard to find.

P.

Mmm just opened the pics up side-by-side and i do believe it is the right crown. Sorry for confusion. Good luck finding a tube. I need one too but if i find two i get one for you..

P.

[drop]

Interesting, thanks for looking! I'll try to take some better quality pics of mine once it's in-hand.

[bertieng]

A question is if the 24-702 crown will fit the modern 24-7030 tube? Mian concern is whether the crown will sit flush all the way down to the bottom of the tube since 702 should have a narrower depth than the 703. Since the o-ring on the 7030 tube will be hide up when the crown is screwed on, it is not too much a concern for me to insist on the 7020 tube as it is almost impossible to be found.

Any idea?

[polexpete]

I thought of using epoxy, but what do you do when you need to replace the tube the next time?

I still have to wonder what Rolex uses when they fit one of these splineless tubes? There must be a tool for that.

Hey Freddy, i don't intend replacing it but if it gets damaged i'm sure it will come out using a pair of pliars and if its knackard it won't matter...

P.

[freddy333]

I am not worried about damaging the existing tube (if I am replacing it), but I am worried that the old tube may break off in the hole or that I may damage the case threads when removing the epoxied in tube.

When I have used epoxy to glue in screws before (I used to rebuild motorcar engines), it was only used as a last resort, because the screw would often not be removable after that. At least not without damaging the threads or risking breaking the screw off in the hole. That is what I am worried about.

[thewightstuff]

that crown is a 703, its threads are at the top portion iside the crown to accomodate the oring at the base of the 703 tube and the threads above this.

702 crowns have the threaded portion starting from the very opening of the crown as the thread on the corresponding 702 tube is night down next to the case and the sleeve is above these to press agains the inside face of the crown.

as such they cant be used on the other tubes, the 703 crown is wider and deeper too

hope that made sense

Edited August 18, 2007 by thewightstuff

[drop]

Yes, I see what you are pointing out - thanks a million!

The crown appeared neither wide nor deep relative to the MBW, thus my initial concern.