When the Submariner Date 1680 was introduced?

[FTX I]

Release year is not exactly clear and I'd like to understand why. Monochrome, Fratellowatches and Wikipedia put the first 1680 in 1966 (that's what I always thought). Bob's Watches seem confident it was in 1969. Never heard of this 60Clicks but they say 1967. I could post many other links with different infos. The release year was not that long ago, so we should have it documented. What's the reason for this uncertainty?

https://monochrome-watches.com/weekl...date-ref-1680/

https://www.fratellowatches.com/role...riner-history/

https://www.bobswatches.com/rolex-bl...iner-1680.html

https://www.60clicks.com/rolex-subma...lectors-guide/

[FTX I]

*crickets*

The Submariner Date is considered by many the iconic Rolex model. It's surprising that no one knows when it was released, especially in the Rolex Forums.

[burnthesehills]

I always thought 1969 which would make this year the 50th anniversary.

[ocho8]

My Rolex magazine says the sub date was released in 1969.

[jps3b]

Originally Posted by burnthesehills

I always thought 1969 which would make this year the 50th anniversary.

Awww man! You mean my Kermit’s a fraud?


@jps3b

[Rashid.bk]

Subscribed.

Originally Posted by ocho8

My Rolex magazine says the sub date was released in 1969.

That seems enough proof for me as most of what I can find has evidence for 1969. This would mark an anniversary but only for the Date complication not the model, it's still a nice milestone as the general public associates the Submariner to be a date watch.

Do any of our vintage members own a Red Submariner Date 1680 with documentation to prove sale or production before 1969?
I'm very interested in this now. The Rolex history website casually jumps over the Submariner Date right over to the Sea-Dweller.
The data that says 1966 or 1967 never say why, it's just a date range that is thrown out there seemingly arbitrarily just to cover the bases.

Mr Wood, Mr Haywood, Mr MacLeod?

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by jps3b

Awww man! You mean my Kermit’s a fraud?


@jps3b

It's clear that Rolex makes no distinction between the complications. It's just a Submariner, for which the watch "model" the Submariner(date or no-date) is what they recognized with the LV.

A few years ago I would have bet my salary that Rolex would not deviate from their tradition. But if the last few years tell us anything is that Rolex does have an eye on it's heritage and history and is taking full advantage of bringing it back, with both Tudor and Rolex. If there was ever a time that I think we would see red writing, now would be a good time.
Or.....surprise!! they do nothing and just update the movement.

[jps3b]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

It's clear that Rolex makes no distinction between the complications. It's just a Submariner, for which the watch "model" the Submariner(date or no-date) is what they recognized with the LV.

A few years ago I would have bet my salary that Rolex would not deviate from their tradition. But if the last few years tell us anything is that Rolex does have an eye on it's heritage and history and is taking full advantage of bringing it back, with both Tudor and Rolex. If there was ever a time that I think we would see red writing, now would be a good time.
Or.....surprise!! they do nothing and just update the movement.

How did we miss that? Hiding in plain sight. Could you imagine. We all just think they are going to do the boring and just update the movement when BAM! They throw in the red writing just because no one was expecting it. I’m on pins and needles


@jps3b

[Chunky]

According to the post in TRF “Reference” section in FAQ, the submariner 1680 which is the first Submariner with date was introduced in 1965


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Haywood_Milton]

I have a 210xxxx case number 1680 on record with a I.69 case back.

Perhaps others could post the first few digits of any with lower case numbers / earlier date codes inside their case-backs?

Insta : haywood_milton_rolex

[Old Expat Beast]

I thought it was 1965, followed by a full gold version in 68 or 69.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Chunky

According to the post in TRF “Reference” section in FAQ, the submariner 1680 which is the first Submariner with date was introduced in 1965


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm no expert but that would be easily proven wrong and impossible by the fact that serial numbers for the earliest Submariner Date 1680 Mk1s begin in the 2 millions where in 1965 we were at 1 millions serials..

The serial number beginning around the 2 millions seems to be the only evidence that perhaps leads us to believe that the watch debuted in 1966/67, or maybe they just had cases left over and used them in 1969.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

I have a 210xxxx case number 1680 on record with a I.69 case back.

Perhaps others could post the first few digits of any with lower case numbers / earlier date codes inside their case-backs?

Insta : haywood_milton_rolex

Thank you for your expertise, about what date would that put the watch(research says that's a Mk1). Is it correct to assume that the case back could have been used from previous years stock because everything was the same except the addition of the date complication.

Is is correct that 2,xxx,xxx cases are from '66 onward or would these still be 1969 watches and onward watches?....

[FTX I]

In Baselworld history, 1931 was the year when the Swiss Watch Show was first held in a dedicated pavilion. It probably means that in the mid sixties all major watch companies used this platform to release new watches. We just need to know which Baselworld had the first 1680.

What amazes me is that we're not talking about archeology. We're talking about the sixties, and the most poplular sports Rolex, so it shouldn't be a mystery.

I'm counting on you guys for a final answer on this thread.



https://wristreview.com/a-brief-history-of-baselworld/

[Haywood_Milton]

With good reasons to say as much, I suggest that 2,1m case numbers would be from 1969.

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

With good reasons to say as much, I suggest that 2,1m case numbers would be from 1969.

I was hoping you had seen some kind of official material from the release period. Can you think of any reason for the apparently unsolved mystery?

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by FTX I

I was hoping you had seen some kind of official material from the release period. Can you think of any reason for the apparently unsolved mystery?

What mystery?

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

What mystery?

The exact release year.

[Haywood_Milton]

Ok, can anyone show examples of 1680s with earlier case numbers?

Alternatively, can anyone show examples with 2m case numbers and justification for thinking that they are from earlier than 1969?

There is a lot of recycled information on the internet. Something incorrect that is copied by half a dozen other people makes it no more correct than it was in the first place. Date charts are frequently among the clearest demonstrations of this.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by FTX I

I was hoping you had seen some kind of official material from the release period. Can you think of any reason for the apparently unsolved mystery?

I don't think it's a mystery really. The issue is various sources throw out dates, they aren't official sources. As one poster said above, The Rolex Submariner magazine says 1969.
I think that what has happened is people have in modern times arbitrarily thrown around the dates "from 1966".
I'm no expert but there aren't any 1680's with before 2 million serial and Mr Milton's example is a very early Mk1 from 1969.

To me it's no mystery, the first Sea-Dweller came to the public in 1967 and the Submariner as far as I can tell was still dateless. With the success of the Sea-Dweller Rolex prepped for and released the Submariner in 1969.
At least that is what I can surmise from perusing through various sound literature.
Anytime time you see a date mentioned before 1969, it states "as early as, or been reported, some say"....who, why....seems like just covering their bases in their article. Fratello for example just has contributors and there are two different versions on the same website.

I have never seen one for sale with a date or serial number before 1969. But I'm eager to learn as much as you. Why we don't have specifics from Basel...because everything was analog...you'd need to walk into a library and pull paper printed materials from a dusty shelf in Switzerland to find out watch release data from 1969.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

Ok, can anyone show examples of 1680s with earlier case numbers?

Alternatively, can anyone show examples with 2m case numbers and justification for thinking that they are from earlier than 1969?

There is a lot of recycled information on the internet. Something incorrect that is copied by half a dozen other people makes it no more correct than it was in the first place. Date charts are frequently among the clearest demonstrations of this.

This exactly!
It's what seems to be the case. Thank you for your expertise.

[Styles Bitchley]

Isn’t Mark Lerman considered to be an authority on red subs? Much if the info around the web traces back to him. Not sure if he’s a forum member. His comprehensive guide on red subs has mk1 case numbers starting at 2.1m.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

I don't think it's a mystery really. The issue is various sources throw out dates, they aren't official sources. As one poster said above, The Rolex Submariner magazine says 1969.
I think that what has happened is people have in modern times arbitrarily thrown around the dates "from 1966".
I'm no expert but there aren't any 1680's with before 2 million serial and Mr Milton's example is a very early Mk1 from 1969.

To me it's no mystery, the first Sea-Dweller came to the public in 1967 and the Submariner as far as I can tell was still dateless. With the success of the Sea-Dweller Rolex prepped for and released the Submariner in 1969.
At least that is what I can surmise from perusing through various sound literature.
Anytime time you see a date mentioned before 1969, it states "as early as, or been reported, some say"....who, why....seems like just covering their bases in their article. Fratello for example just has contributors and there are two different versions on the same website.

I have never seen one for sale with a date or serial number before 1969. But I'm eager to learn as much as you. Why we don't have specifics from Basel...because everything was analog...you'd need to walk into a library and pull paper printed materials from a dusty shelf in Switzerland to find out watch release data from 1969.

Or Rolex could simply say we released the Submarined Date in xxxx. Overall I agree with your post Rashid. I'd like to see it first, but if Rolex magazine says 1969 that's it. I just want official information and not anecdotal evidence. And it's the first time I read that the Sea Dweller came before the Sub Date. I thought they released the Submariner, Sub Date and then the SD, but I'm no expert by any means. People know everything about Air Kings, DateJust, Explorer, Milgauss, Submariner, but not the Sub Date. I don't understand that.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by FTX I

Or Rolex could simply say we released the Submarined Date in xxxx. Overall I agree with your post Rashid. I'd like to see it first, but if Rolex magazine says 1969 that's it. I just want official information and not anecdotal evidence. And it's the first time I read that the Sea Dweller came before the Sub Date. I thought they released the Submariner, Sub Date and then the SD, but I'm no expert by any means. People know everything about Air Kings, DateJust, Explorer, Milgauss, Submariner, but not the Sub Date. I don't understand that.

I concur with you, I didn't take note of this until I realized that this year could be the Submariner "Date's" 50th anniversary. Will likely result in nothing but interesting at the very least.

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

I concur with you, I didn't take note of this until I realized that this year could be the Submariner "Date's" 50th anniversary. Will likely result in nothing but interesting at the very least.

I was born in 1969 and always thought the Sub Date was older, but we may have a very interesting way to find out this year.

[FTX I]

Another vote for 1966. I would really like to find out the official release year but no answer so far.

Anyone here own the Mondani books? What they say about it?



https://www.chrono24.com/magazine/th...-p_32882/#gref

[subx]

its 1969 end thread ˆˆ

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by FTX I

Another vote for 1966. I would really like to find out the official release year but no answer so far.

Anyone here own the Mondani books? What they say about it?



https://www.chrono24.com/magazine/th...-p_32882/#gref

Dowling & Hess say 1965 (The Best of Time: Rolex Wristwatches, p.258), and Mondani says 1967, and 1969 for the 18k 1680/8 (The Rolex Submariner Story, p.89). Skeet & Urul say 1966 (Vintage Rolex Sport Models, p.42)

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Dowling & Hess say 1965 (The Best of Time: Rolex Wristwatches, p.258), and Mondani says 1967, and 1969 for the 18k 1680/8 (The Rolex Submariner Story, p.89). Skeet & Urul say 1966 (Vintage Rolex Sport Models, p.42)

What I find more interesting than anything is the lack of evidence. There isn't one example that I have seen of a 1680 Submariner with a serial number in the 1.xxx.xxx.
They all start in the 2 millions which is roughly the year 1969. If the Submariner Date was sold in 1965 or 67 wouldn't there be one today, at least...one watch or a couple.

I'm just an enthusiast and haven't written books or done any thorough research, but where are the watches that they are talking about. The ones from 1969-onward are present and accounted for.

[nigelUK]

Originally Posted by FTX I

I was born in 1969 and always thought the Sub Date was older, but we may have a very interesting way to find out this year.

I was also born in 1969 and thought that was introduction of 1680 ... as I was looking to get a birth year/first year sub ..

I'm sure i'd read it in Rolex literature