special treat for dadswatch2- bevel edge content LOL

[CaveDiver]

Originally Posted by jedly1

actually it is machine, i spent last week trying to persuade either Rolex Australia or the Rolex trained independent nearby to buy the machine, but apparently its about £25k worth and neither can justify it when most people are perefctly happy with a standard finish, and its only a few mad watch geeks who notice the difference.

there are a few watchmakers who have a damned good go by hand, but if you put it under a loupe or macro photo you can always see some wobble and unevenness.

Jedly,
You have mentioned several times that Geneva is one of two places that can put this original finish back on one of these watches. How would someone go about sending and getting Geneva to service a vintage watch? Also, did 5512 subs come with this “bevel”/chamfer
Thanks

[DadsWatch72]

I was talking about this photo of the lug and the area where the endlink usually caused a wear area close to the case, especially on the lower left lug.

In regard to what you "thought" I was implying......I wasn't implying anything of the sort in regard to deceit. If thats how you took it then you were mistaken. If you look back to my first three posts I stated...First post...

"I have never seen a DRSD with black lettering on the caseback. Even on the DRSD website.......this is the first one I have ever seen. Only the newer models have black lettering on the back. Those look more like wear on the back of the lugs than it looks like scratches IMO. My caseback has never been polished and it doesn't have black lettering."

This just means exactly what I wrote....I have never seen that and it is surprising to me....nothing more. Next post...

"ahhh, thanks. I am talking with some vintage guys right now about this. They are saying the black lettering is factory. First example I have ever seen with it.........including the DRSD website."

Again....I acknowledged others are verifying the black lettering and I am again showing surprise.....next post

"One guy on the Vintage RF said that mine might not have had an edge like that from the factory since Rolex was inconsistant with these models from that time period (which makes sense). I also remember seeing/holding the watch when I was 10 years old. It layed around the house on my fathers dresser, coffee table, ect... but I never remember it having black lettering on the back or a time when it was peeling off. "

Here I am commenting again on a possibility of both being from Rolex and that I don't remember the my watch ever having the other style of chamfor (there I said it Steelinox ). I never came across as making any referal to you being misleading or crooked but in your response to those three posts you sure blasted me and I was offended. Hey.....I don't claim to have the experience that you do. I am only commenting on what I have seen and commenting on my surprise at seeing something new.....nothing more. I must admit that I probably wouldn't have come across that way later in this thread if you hadn't blasted me in the first place. But it's all good. I'm not made of glass and its been an interesting debate never the less.

[jedly1]

Originally Posted by CaveDiver

Jedly,
You have mentioned several times that Geneva is one of two places that can put this original finish back on one of these watches. How would someone go about sending and getting Geneva to service a vintage watch? Also, did 5512 subs come with this “bevel”/chamfer
Thanks

yes i would expect to see it on a 60's 70's sub of all models ( even more pronounced on late 50's and early 60's 5512.

As i said in one of my very early posts on this, i have known guys fly the atlantic to get service done by Geneva or Bexley for this finish, or at least the usual method is to get a friend in Europe/UK to deal with it in a local name, past that it gets difficult, as you know Rolex USA is a seperate company from Rolex rest of world ( not a subsiduary), and has the protection of an import ban on Rolex coming into USA, so i would imagine getting it to Geneva is easy, fedex etc, request an estimate as usual etc. - return - hmm , think everyone is aware of both the urban myths of watches being confiscated and in fact a couple of real ones.

The concern comes on getting it back and the hassle that might generate concerning customs, in principal it should be fine although maybe requiring an explanation if it was held by an 'arsey' customs official. The other issue may be Rolex themselves, who, and im not sure about this, may simply refer it back to Rolex usa as may be the terms of their agreement.


On the bevel i want to make one final point, i only raised this subject because it was initially discussed on this board as being a fault, an example of poor workmanship etc. I hope that to most i have demonstrated it is NOT, it is just an original finish as per the factory spec, and is in fact quite the opposite it demands a high level of skill.

However, what is important to stress is that IMHO having it is a nicety, a small plus, maybe worth a small premium to some who look for that, the kind of detail that only starts to apply only when everything else is pretty much perfect and you are lookign for small differences.. BUT it really must be stressed it does not count as a serious minus point NOT to have it nor something that counts as a detriment to a watch in 99% of peoples eyes, mine included. A nice evenly polished case with plenty of metal, no corrosion and clear numbers is what counts. dial condition, hands, bezels, lug thicknes, no corrosion, service hsitory, box and original guarantee papers, provenance etc etc.. will all count to me and most collectors a lot more than a bevel or not.

[greekbum]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

"One guy on the Vintage RF said that mine might not have had an edge like that from the factory since Rolex was inconsistant with these models from that time period (which makes sense).

I have found this talk only from dealers.This way they can sell inconsistant (questionable) pieces. I think enough has been proven .If you think different please by all means show proof.Every Rolex advert from the late 50's to mid 70's clearly without any doubt shows a beveled edge.

[DadsWatch72]

Originally Posted by greekbum

I have found this talk only from dealers.This way they can sell inconsistant (questionable) pieces. I think enough has been proven .If you think different please by all means show proof.Every Rolex advert from the late 50's to mid 70's clearly without any doubt shows a beveled edge.

Even Jed talks of inconsistancys.......here is a quote from a previous thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DadsWatch72
I see what your saying about an optical illusion. Here is a watch that you posted that is basically new. You said it had never been polished and worn only 2 or 3 times and then put in a safe. The lugs should be larger than any DRSD Mark IV lugs that doesn't have that bevel ie.....a DRSD without/missing/polished/worn etc. the bevel. Is that safe to say?

ps. Is that bracelet a 93150?

Originally Posted by jedly1

yes , mostly except ,

a. and here's is the interesting part, cases weren't robot finished back then, so in other nos we have seen there have Been caliper measurements taken and quite often there is variation in width as new from the factory between all four lugs

b the angle of polish to the side elevation

c. The equally important polish to the top surface of the lug which will also reduce the bevel

[STEELINOX]

Just a sidebar about sending pieces to GENEVA...

I have had no problems getting service from GENEVA.
I would rather work with GENEVA than RUSA even for "within Warranty" period items.
The key is when you ship it to them, clearly it must be stated that the piece be indicated on the "customs dec" that this is a "Precision Instrument for Repair" and this has gotten my ROLEXs back n forth without question. ROLEX GENEVA is very good with the return paperwork as well and comes back as, "REPAIRED". And since it is from ROLEX; RUSA has no jurisdiction over the piece as it has been represented from the papers accompanying the piece...

I take great satisfaction in sending work to GENEVA bypassing the monster, RUSA!

Thanks,
Randy

[jedly1]

feels like we are nearly done here but as the owner has only just given permission to use the scans, ive already posted another NOS 1655 in another thread but i wanted to show this, some of the nicest sharpest scans of a NOS 1972 case finish, bought new in USA 1975 and never worn. many thanks to kevin O for permission to use the scans.

[STEELINOX]

The second picture clearly shows how this was finished "by hand" ...

[greekbum]

Jed excellent what else to say.........drooooooooooooooooooooolllllllllllllll llll.Thanks for sharing those excellent pictures

[STEELINOX]

Yes Jed, outstanding examples...

[Safetrends]

That is really a piece of art. Those photographs are excellent, the detail is great.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by mike

Someone will always have a better example of any given reference. What's important to the hobby in general and you and me in particular is that collectors and gentlemen like Jed willingly share their information and expertise with all of us.

Without the generosity of collectors of this calibre we would not be where we are at today.

Have to agree Mike must say its one of the best examples I have seen wonderful patina on dial too.

[SG 1550]

Although it got a little heated! this has been IMO an interesting thread up until after post 76. I've learnt something from it and enjoyed it also. Now the "Big Sigs" will move in like Hyenias for the leftovers I expect.

[mike]

Originally Posted by jedly1

feels like we are nearly done here but as the owner has only just given permission to use the scans, ive already posted another NOS 1655 in another thread but i wanted to show this, some of the nicest sharpest scans of a NOS 1972 case finish, bought new in USA 1975 and never worn. many thanks to kevin O for permission to use the scans.

Jed, thank you (and to Kevin) for posting these.

As you know Kevin is another collector who has assembled a collection most could only dream about.

In no small measure it is because of the efforts of collectors like Kevin, yourself, Ed, Tom, and others who not only keep the heritage that is vintage Rolex secure, but serve as a benchmark for the education of all.

My hat is off.

[DadsWatch72]

Here is an interesting website regarding the Tritium lume. It says you can bring back old lume with the strobe from a camera flash (1998 watch). Maybe someone can give it a try on an older model.

http://www.wristwatchphoto.com/2009/...m-to-glow.html

[STEELINOX]

I am also puzzled as to why the lug widths of the "winding stem" side are "narrower" than the "9" side...
The "1 lug" looks like it is and the chamfer seems apparent...

[Orchi]

Err buddies...whenever Orchi hears the seductive words like Patina...
sexy bevel edges n chamfer...
it would tickle Orchi on the soft spots...

There are more examples(like 5 Gigs of pics)...
showing the Patina effects on Dials...original bevel edges n chamfer...

But Orchi digresses...

[mike]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

Here is an interesting website regarding the Tritium lume. It says you can bring back old lume with the strobe from a camera flash (1998 watch). Maybe someone can give it a try on an older model.

http://www.wristwatchphoto.com/2009/...m-to-glow.html

Not suprising especially given the reference is a Panerai which are known for their luminosity reguardless of the era.

My own gilt dial 1675 will exibit some brief luminosity if exposed to a strong light source. (Of course one watch does not a survey make)

It's long been discussed among collectors that Rolex at times "played" with the paint matrix of vintage pieces.

Interestingly examples from a latter era do not seem to possess the same ability to charge from a light source as earlier references again causing one to wonder about the paint combination.

What is known (and reported by no less an authority than James Dowling) is that the paint matrix of older pieces consists of three things;

1. Tritium--which in of itself does not "glow" but rather acts as a catalyst for the
2. Phosphers contained in the mix to "glow" and
3. The bonding agent--that which we see--the vast majority of the material making up the indice.

There is that body of evidence that suggests what we see is simply the phosphers excited by a strong outside source.

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by Orchi

Err buddies...whenever Orchi hears the seductive words like Patina...
sexy bevel edges n chamfer...
it would tickle Orchi on the soft spots...

There are more examples(like 5 Gigs of pics)...
showing the Patina effects on Dials...original bevel edges n chamfer...

But Orchi digresses...

"Coochy coochy coo" for us all Orchi !
Outstanding examples of chamfer-dom !

Thanks,
Randy

[DadsWatch72]

Originally Posted by mike

Not suprising especially given the reference is a Panerai which are known for their luminosity reguardless of the era.

My own gilt dial 1675 will exibit some brief luminosity if exposed to a strong light source. (Of course one watch does not a survey make)

It's long been discussed among collectors that Rolex at times "played" with the paint matrix of vintage pieces.

Interestingly examples from a latter era do not seem to possess the same ability to charge from a light source as earlier references again causing one to wonder about the paint combination.

What is known (and reported by no less an authority than James Dowling) is that the paint matrix of older pieces consists of three things;

1. Tritium--which in of itself does not "glow" but rather acts as a catalyst for the
2. Phosphers contained in the mix to "glow" and
3. The bonding agent--that which we see--the vast majority of the material making up the indice.

There is that body of evidence that suggests what we see is simply the phosphers excited by a strong outside source.

What year 1675 is it that works? That is interesting that the older ones can "come back to life" better than the newer models. And it makes sense that Rolexed "played with the mix" since there is so many shades of patina. I wonder if mine will ever patina or if they got the mix just right on that paticular dial batch. There are many types of phosphor (red, white etc.) and I wonder if they didn't try a variety of them in their mixes to see what worked best but causing differences in the color once degraded years later.

[CaveDiver]

Even my dad’s 5512 still has some evidence of chamfer but seems to be more prevalent on the crown side of the case. I won’t disgrace this thread with a photo of it though. The watch is nowhere close these examples.

Just a warning about exposing your old dial to prolonged intense lighting sources; it could indeed lighten the dial as well.

[DadsWatch72]

Originally Posted by CaveDiver

Even my dad’s 5512 still has some evidence of chamfer but seems to be more prevalent on the crown side of the case. I won’t disgrace this thread with a photo of it though. The watch is nowhere close these examples.

Just a warning about exposing your old dial to prolonged intense lighting sources; it could indeed lighten the dial as well.

I couldn't look any worse than this.....you should post it.

[mike]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

What year 1675 is it that works? That is interesting that the older ones can "come back to life" better than the newer models. And it makes sense that Rolexed "played with the mix" since there is so many shades of patina. I wonder if mine will ever patina or if they got the mix just right on that paticular dial batch. There are many types of phosphor (red, white etc.) and I wonder if they didn't try a variety of them in their mixes to see what worked best but causing differences in the color once degraded years later.

It's a 1.3 mil gilt.

[DadsWatch72]

[QUOTE=mike;1767856]It's a 1.3 mil gilt.

Very nice looking GMT.

[CaveDiver]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

I couldn't look any worse than this.....you should post it.

That does not look bad at all. Only missing a bezel.
I was not referring to wear to the watch, but it being in near new and the rarity of the model. As for rarity I have a late 70’s SS Seiko and when purchased new there was no other like it around. Since 2005 I have searched the internet many times and only have found one watch like it but it has a different color dial. Rare as a two headed chicken but worth about as much as a rock. All original even the spring bars and keeps better time than any Rolex lol… But I would not post it either to disgrace this thread

[STEELINOX]

Originally Posted by CaveDiver

That does not look bad at all. Only missing a bezel.
I was not referring to wear to the watch, but it being in near new and the rarity of the model. As for rarity I have a late 70’s SS Seiko and when purchased new there was no other like it around. Since 2005 I have searched the internet many times and only have found one watch like it but it has a different color dial. Rare as a two headed chicken but worth about as much as a rock. All original even the spring bars and keeps better time than any Rolex lol… But I would not post it either to disgrace this thread

Well, post it in the "Other Brands forum" or whatever its called...

[KevinO]

Kinda OT, but I've always loved the mid-50's early 60's edge treatments Rolex did. BIG bevels (chamfer ;-). Also thought it was interesting that on early sport models Rolex satined the sides as well (which rarely survives)

6542









6200 profile



Bexley still does a nice job today..

[mike]

Welcome Kevin.

Thank you so much for posting. Your's is a collection that can only be described as amazing. Not only for rarity, but the quality is nothing short of museum grade.

[STEELINOX]

Outstanding Chamfers Kevin !

[greekbum]

Kevin amazing pieces!!