Rolex

chipshop
6

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Trade up to Paul Newman

They weren't subs - I can't afford those and I wanted to start start with the modest end of the line anyway. As chance would have it, I came across a Precision 6694 (manual) first and then a Date 1500 (auto). I'm glad I did: there's something fundamental to the Rolex character in these two. I love them both and I'm going to make them pretty again...

My 6694 has returned after 5 weeks waiting for my old school friend to obtain and fit a new crown and tube. Mind you, I shouldn’t moan: he kindly polished the entire exterior, removed the movement, clean the components, test the accuracy of the movement, touch up the dial, replace the movement and re-test the time-keeping. Apparently, its “very” accurate.  So not quite a full service.

Now I’ve got it back and with the aid of my newly-acquired  10x loupe, I have been able to have a closer look at what we already know is an “incorrect” or dodgy dial. It is white (which I like) but has no minute marks between the hour batons. In addition, it has “Rolex Day-Date” under the “12” position and “Oyster-Perpetual” above the “6” position.

It also has a very short (11 links) oyster bracelet with 557 on both end pieces  and 78350 and 19 on both links attached to the end pieces. The clasp has, L3 STEELINOX 78350 on it.

The watch case I have is serial no 184xxxx, which - according to www.oysterworld.de - is a 1967-68 date of manufacture.

Here's a link to photos kindly taken for me by the local camera club: www.flickr.com

So: suggestions re dial and/or bracelet?

My second watch is a 1967 (also) with model ref 1500.

This is the link to photos of these:  www.flickr.com

According to The Rolex Report, model ref 1500 was an Oyster Date which first had a 1565 calibre movement then a 1575.

According to the Rolex Report, calibre 1565 was introduced in 1959 based on calibre 1530. Calibre 1575 was first introduced in 1965 (and therefore the correct movement for my watch) and was engraved with “1570” on the bridge of the self winding mechanism.

As far as the missing movement goes, rather than wait for a complete (or nearly) movement, I think it would be more fun to try and acquire as many individual Rolex movement parts as possible. However, one semi-professional I have already consulted thinks that would be “madness”. Anyone disagree?

Cheers,

Chipshop