My Posts

I am wondering if this watch looks correct as far as it having a caliber K1001 without the usual sub-second hand. I suspect that not all K1001 movements were equipped with a second hand. Does anyone have another example to show, or know the history of the movement? Thanks in advance.

But K5 should be about 1987 which is VERY late for a 16013. I would think it would be 18k. The long number below the K5 should be the model number of the bracelet and the last two digits should tell you.

Watches with many small screws holding the back in place are all prone to this problem eventually which is why Rolex doesn't use that method.

The number on the clasp of the bracelet should end in either 0, 14, or 18 identifying steel or 14k or 18k. Also, the date of production and color of the gold can both be used to make an educated guess.

I love these watches. I can't wait to hold one in my hands. Thanks for the great pics. -Rigby