What's the deal with the red triangle around the pearl on the newest 6538's?

[pwygant]

It seems many collectors are now offering various versions of the 6538, 5508, etc. I don't know too much about the vintage Bond history, but I have read most of the articles on our board. It seems among our little club, that the 6538 is the model reference that closest refer to/known as the typical Bond. However, after checking out Nanuqs gens... or not... and other... it seems most of the 6538 are not red around the pearl area? Am I going blind?

//Cheers

[freddy333]

Probably not.

Here is Connery's Sub from Goldfinger

[Dizzy]

check this link for some old sub history. 6538 with red on bezel...

http://www.bjsonline.com/watches/articles/0018_1.shtml

<snip> Surprisingly, the ref. 6538 kept the same model reference. 1957-1961. The new ref. 6538 Submariner had a heavier case, bezel markings for the first 15 minutes, and a red triangle at the 12 position. It had a larger Triplelock style crown.... <snip>

[pwygant]

check this link for some old sub history. 6538 with red on bezel...http://www.bjsonline.com/watches/articles/0018_1.shtml<snip> Surprisingly, the ref. 6538 kept the same model reference. 1957-1961. The new ref. 6538 Submariner had a heavier case, bezel markings for the first 15 minutes, and a red triangle at the 12 position. It had a larger Triplelock style crown.... <snip>

Great Read... I educated myself... I guess I'll buy one as well...

Strangely enough, there are people that swear up and down that red is a must and others swear that red was ONLY on the Milgauss, others swear the minutes chapter on the bezel insert had tic marks from 0-15 and others swear there should never be tic marks from 0-15. I just bought a 1675 GMT that has a dial that was supposedly never made, and then a photo came up over on VRF that shows my watch with a genuine dial like mine.The only rule of thumb with vintage Rolex is, there ARE no rules of thumb. Almost anything goes/went.

Thanks for the feedback...

[Dizzy]

yeah it seems that there werent very accurate records kept of what they were building back then. There was a LOT of experimenting going on in these early years...

[Dizzy]

WOW could you imagine?

yikes!

as long as i can have the box of the later "Comex" parts then I'll be happy, you can have the old "James Bond" parts

LOL

You got that right... it's like they had boxes of dials and inserts and crowns and backs, and just.............assembled them.

Too bad we can't come across a few of those boxes now, eh?

[southcoast68]

Strangely enough, there are people that swear up and down that red is a must and others swear that red was ONLY on the Milgauss, others swear the minutes chapter on the bezel insert had tic marks from 0-15 and others swear there should never be tic marks from 0-15. I just bought a 1675 GMT that has a dial that was supposedly never made, and then a photo came up over on VRF that shows my watch with a genuine dial like mine.

The only rule of thumb with vintage Rolex is, there ARE no rules of thumb. Almost anything goes/went.

Funny you mention your GMT Nanuq, I was just looking at your pics and thought "Aha, his GMT has the same dial as mine". Up to this point, I had only seen one other GMT with the dial like ours, and that was in John Brozek's book on Rolex replicas. I really need to get up some good pics of that to share, maybe tonight I'll take some pics. Thanks, I was thinking that my GMT had a refinished dial on it, now I feel that I am in real good company .