
Amanico champions the Tudor Submariner Marine Nationale Ref. 94010, arguing for its rightful place alongside legendary Rolex military watches. He meticulously compares its features, history, and perceived prestige, challenging the notion that an in-house movement or brand name alone dictates a watch's value. This post is essential for vintage dive watch enthusiasts and those interested in the historical significance of military-issued timepieces.















The Rolex Submariner reference 1680 is notable as the first Submariner model to feature a date complication, marking a significant evolution for the line. Introduced in the late 1960s, it bridged the gap between the earlier no-date Submariners and later iterations, offering enhanced functionality while retaining the robust characteristics of the professional tool watch. This reference is distinguished by its single cyclops date magnifier on the crystal, a feature that would become a hallmark of many subsequent Rolex models.
This reference typically features a 40mm steel case, housing the self-winding Caliber 1575 movement. The movement provides a power reserve of approximately 48 hours. The crystal is acrylic, commonly referred to as Plexiglas, contributing to its vintage aesthetic. Water resistance for the 1680 is rated at 200 meters, consistent with its design as a reliable underwater instrument.
For collectors, the reference 1680 is highly sought after, particularly early examples with "Red Submariner" dials where the word "Submariner" is printed in red. These variants represent a distinct period in Rolex's production history and are prized for their rarity and aesthetic appeal. The 1680 appeals to those who appreciate the blend of historical significance, functional design, and the tangible qualities of vintage Rolex manufacturing.
And I really wonder if I won't end with both of them... Best, my friend. Nicolas
I don't see this vintage in any way inferior to a submariner. It's a tough toolwatch that really conforms to all a diver will want, and i find the hour hand design incredibly legible. Vintages are like art, appreciated out of context and composition. The context part is strong, with it's affinity to the military, and the composition, well, only lacking in terms of the ETA movement. Were this to house a Rolex movement then, wow, the value might be on par with the vintage subs. Tudor has to forge
Well, I don't know Tudor enough to have a definitive point of view on their modern production. But the more I dig into the past of this brand, the more I appreciate some of their products, like this Tudor MN, or some awesome non crownguard Subs, too. The only point I disagree a bit is about the ETA movement. It seems very reliable and damn accurate, to me. Will have to learn more about this movement. Best, and thanks for this very well written input. Nicolas
And fantastic posts elicit passionate replies.Agree abt ETA,it was probably advanced in that era and context.Great post, Nic!
for sure.....but.... as I already told you, my choice would have been the other (round) one..... However I do like the creamy indexes... and you are right... the snow flakes has a harder look and more unusual.... the round a softer/elegant look ..... however... you cannot go wrong with either watch.... I do share your appreciation of the vintage Tudor watches but I am skeptic on their current new line..... Thanks for posting such an informative post my friend.... Enjoy it Cheers
This thread is active on the Rolex forum with 51 replies. Share your knowledge with fellow collectors.
Join the Discussion →