ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

clarkhardball · 1 June 2012, 07:17 AM

Hello all.

I am looking to purchase a watch from 1980 to commemorate a special year in my life. All things except price being equal (same year, same condition, same effort to purchase, both with its original parts), what would be a better choice? A 1680 or a 5513? This shall be my first intended vintage purchase. All my other vintage pieces were just traded and flipped. This one I am really going after. Thanks for lending an ear.

Cheers

springer · 1 June 2012, 09:23 AM

I prefer the watches with dates and you can't beat a 1680 for value - circa 1980.

I would definitely go with the 1680 which would offer better value in the long run.

TimeToGo · 1 June 2012, 10:04 AM

1680 - also!

Justjosh · 1 June 2012, 10:23 AM

1680 gets my vote.

drockadam · 1 June 2012, 10:29 AM

Go with the 1680 my friend!

RC2 · 1 June 2012, 11:43 AM

1680

pdoukas · 1 June 2012, 11:56 AM

Between the two, 1680. I have to have a date function unless it's a 1016

SennaFan · 1 June 2012, 01:23 PM

1680

Shame, I just sold a near perfect 16753 GMT Master form 1980 on this forum.

Tudor66 · 1 June 2012, 02:13 PM

1680. The date is a necessary item to have, and I personally like the the cyclops...

This is not my watch, largely because I can't talk the AD down to a reasonable price, but man, look at this Patina. The 1680 is on my 12 month list, I just need to keep adding to the watch fund each month....

Kingair · 1 June 2012, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by springer

I prefer the watches with dates and you can't beat a 1680 for value - circa 1980.

I would definitely go with the 1680 which would offer better value in the long run.

x 2

HAGOne

HERITAGE82 · 1 June 2012, 06:55 PM

A quick question: Is this going to be your daily wear piece or is it going in a rotaion with others?

The reason I ask is if its your only daily wear piece then the 1680 is the way to go. However I would pick the 5513 if it was going in a rotation due to the lack of date and easy set and go (the 1680 date was not quckset, and can be quite time consuming to set).

Either way you can't go wrong withe either Vintage Sub!

michel33 · 1 June 2012, 10:33 PM

5513 for me. If I had to keep only one, it would be a 5513, and I own a 1680 as well.
The 5513 is the perfect diving watch, so well balanced without the date and the cyclop. And who needs the date underwater? LOL.

ecsub44 · 1 June 2012, 10:38 PM

5513. A date is a superfluous complication on a watch.

lhanddds · 1 June 2012, 11:48 PM

1680 for me

clarkhardball · 2 June 2012, 02:09 AM

The plot thickens! Thank you for all your thoughts. I am still undecided. Here's what I am choosing from..

azguy · 2 June 2012, 02:34 AM

Easy, BOTH

Yeah, right.......

I would pick the 1680, that looks like a great example

learningtofly · 2 June 2012, 03:52 AM

Wow - I'm really surprised at the responses.

I've had beautiful examples of both, and for me it HAS to be the 5513... the quintessential Rolex with it's two-line, beautifully clean dial. To be honest, though, you really should choose the one you prefer because you can't go wrong with either.

Robbyvm · 2 June 2012, 04:01 AM

i would go for the 5513, the simplicity of this watch makes me fall in love with it more every time i wear it (but you should change the luminova pearl for one matching the nice patina of the markers...)

you can save up and decide to buy a 1680 later (and then make it a red one)

Kingair · 2 June 2012, 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbyvm

i would go for the 5513, the simplicity of this watch makes me fall in love with it more every time i wear it
you can save up and decide to buy a 1680 later (and then make it a red one)

Nice pic Robby

Prettig weekend

HAGW

phillycheez · 2 June 2012, 04:07 AM

Are you choosing from those in the pics you posted?

Between those two I like the 1680. Just a better all around example.

You can't go wrong with either though. I'm heading the 5513 route myself.

clarkhardball · 2 June 2012, 05:48 AM

Yup those are the actual watches I'm choosing from. Thanks for the responses. Keep em coming as I am still on the fence.

phillycheez · 2 June 2012, 07:31 AM

Can't tell from pics (plus I'm on phone) but are those replacement hands on the 1680?

clarkhardball · 2 June 2012, 08:14 AM

The hands match the dial, the only one that does not match on both watches is the insert on the 5513. They are 1000usd apart in pricing btw

sishac · 2 June 2012, 08:40 AM

I'm going to vote for the 5513 for the simple reason that if the watch is in rotation, the non-quickset 1680 would take more time to set than the 5513. They are both great watches, so it really depends on what you are looking for...the clean lines and the domed crystal of the 5513, or the uniqueness of the tophat crystal and date on the 1680.

Personally, since my 1675 has the date, I'd go with the 5513 (I also have a vintage Omega SM300 and Speedy Pro, both without dates, and I love them!) I don't miss the date at all, but do enjoy seeing the silver datewheel and open 6 and 9s of the 1675!

Either way, you're making a great choice!!!

xela · 2 June 2012, 09:55 AM

That 5513 is nicer out of the 2, except the pearl is lumi instead of tritium.. Go for 5513..

clarkhardball · 2 June 2012, 10:09 AM

Yeah I noticed the pearl too. Is the insert "period correct"? Is it supposed to be fat font insert or this is right?

gregorpal · 2 June 2012, 10:37 AM

5513, simple, clean, you´ll just love it...

bluemartinifan · 2 June 2012, 11:04 AM

Are the case and lugs on the 5513 fatter and less polished? The crown guards on the 5513 (hard to tell w/ the pics) look fatter and flatter at the top (good).
I am of course a 5513 fan due to the pure iconic look...

clarkhardball · 2 June 2012, 11:09 AM

Here's the 5513 in detail lemme know what you guys think - http://www.ebay.com/itm/270984037155...t_18688wt_1219

clarkhardball · 2 June 2012, 11:12 AM

The 1680 has a much fresher look since I have seen it in the metal but it did undergo some light polishing during service. Lugs still retain some edges. The 5513 on the other hand according to the seller is untouched. It looks it :))

1 June 2012, 07:17 AM	#1
clarkhardball "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jake Location: Manila Posts: 323	1980 Watch for Posterity: 1680 vs. 5513 Hello all. I am looking to purchase a watch from 1980 to commemorate a special year in my life. All things except price being equal (same year, same condition, same effort to purchase, both with its original parts), what would be a better choice? A 1680 or a 5513? This shall be my first intended vintage purchase. All my other vintage pieces were just traded and flipped. This one I am really going after. Thanks for lending an ear. Cheers

1 June 2012, 09:23 AM	#2
springer 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: jP Location: Texas Watch: GMT-MASTER Posts: 17,115	I prefer the watches with dates and you can't beat a 1680 for value - circa 1980. I would definitely go with the 1680 which would offer better value in the long run. __________________ Member of NAWCC since 1990. INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics.

1 June 2012, 10:23 AM	#4
Justjosh "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: Josh Location: WI Watch: This Posts: 856	1680 gets my vote. __________________ Speed is fine, but accuracy is final.

1 June 2012, 10:29 AM	#5
drockadam "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Adam Location: Ontario, Canada Watch: Pepsi. Posts: 5,749	Go with the 1680 my friend! __________________ - Adam Instagram: @GMTSUBTIME

1 June 2012, 11:43 AM	#6
RC2 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Rich Location: NC Watch: Rolex 1675 Posts: 2,359	1680 __________________ Rich Member of Nylon Nation Red Sox Nation Instagram watchguy97

1 June 2012, 10:04 AM	#3
TimeToGo 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: North Florida Posts: 16,630	1680 - also!

1 June 2012, 11:56 AM	#7
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	Between the two, 1680. I have to have a date function unless it's a 1016

1 June 2012, 01:23 PM	#8
SennaFan Banned Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: OB Watch: The Birdie Posts: 603	1680 Shame, I just sold a near perfect 16753 GMT Master form 1980 on this forum.

1 June 2012, 06:55 PM	#11
HERITAGE82 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: South Florida Posts: 3,423	A quick question: Is this going to be your daily wear piece or is it going in a rotaion with others? The reason I ask is if its your only daily wear piece then the 1680 is the way to go. However I would pick the 5513 if it was going in a rotation due to the lack of date and easy set and go (the 1680 date was not quckset, and can be quite time consuming to set). Either way you can't go wrong withe either Vintage Sub! __________________ - Rolex Explorer - 214270 - Tudor Black Bay - 79230B - Tudor Chronograph - 79270P - Breitling Chronomat - 10th Anniv. - Huguenin Freres Speedmaster Prototype

1 June 2012, 10:33 PM	#12
michel33 Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: france Posts: 796	5513 for me. If I had to keep only one, it would be a 5513, and I own a 1680 as well. The 5513 is the perfect diving watch, so well balanced without the date and the cyclop. And who needs the date underwater? LOL.

1 June 2012, 10:38 PM	#13
ecsub44 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: US Watch: Sub Posts: 3,175	5513. A date is a superfluous complication on a watch. __________________ *侘寂 -- wabi-sabi --* acceptance of transience and imperfection by finding beauty in that which is imperfect, impermanent, and incomplete Commissioner of WEIRD POLICE , Badge # ecsub44

1 June 2012, 11:48 PM	#14
lhanddds Banned Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: USA Watch: of course Posts: 8,429	1680 for me

2 June 2012, 02:09 AM	#15
clarkhardball "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jake Location: Manila Posts: 323	The plot thickens! Thank you for all your thoughts. I am still undecided. Here's what I am choosing from..

2 June 2012, 02:34 AM	#16
azguy Banned Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: ------- Location: ------- Watch: --------- Posts: 12,609	Easy, BOTH Yeah, right....... I would pick the 1680, that looks like a great example

2 June 2012, 03:52 AM	#17
learningtofly 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Real Name: Tony Location: London, England Watch: Hmmm... Posts: 2,479	Wow - I'm really surprised at the responses. I've had beautiful examples of both, and for me it HAS to be the 5513... the quintessential Rolex with it's two-line, beautifully clean dial. To be honest, though, you really should choose the one you prefer because you can't go wrong with either. __________________ Tony

2 June 2012, 04:01 AM	#18
Robbyvm "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,239	i would go for the 5513, the simplicity of this watch makes me fall in love with it more every time i wear it (but you should change the luminova pearl for one matching the nice patina of the markers...) you can save up and decide to buy a 1680 later (and then make it a red one)

2 June 2012, 04:07 AM	#20
phillycheez "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Portland Posts: 398	Are you choosing from those in the pics you posted? Between those two I like the 1680. Just a better all around example. You can't go wrong with either though. I'm heading the 5513 route myself.

2 June 2012, 05:48 AM	#21
clarkhardball "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jake Location: Manila Posts: 323	Yup those are the actual watches I'm choosing from. Thanks for the responses. Keep em coming as I am still on the fence.

2 June 2012, 07:31 AM	#22
phillycheez "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Portland Posts: 398	Can't tell from pics (plus I'm on phone) but are those replacement hands on the 1680?

2 June 2012, 08:14 AM	#23
clarkhardball "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jake Location: Manila Posts: 323	The hands match the dial, the only one that does not match on both watches is the insert on the 5513. They are 1000usd apart in pricing btw

2 June 2012, 08:40 AM	#24
sishac "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Wayne Watch: Rolex 5512 Posts: 142	I'm going to vote for the 5513 for the simple reason that if the watch is in rotation, the non-quickset 1680 would take more time to set than the 5513. They are both great watches, so it really depends on what you are looking for...the clean lines and the domed crystal of the 5513, or the uniqueness of the tophat crystal and date on the 1680. Personally, since my 1675 has the date, I'd go with the 5513 (I also have a vintage Omega SM300 and Speedy Pro, both without dates, and I love them!) I don't miss the date at all, but do enjoy seeing the silver datewheel and open 6 and 9s of the 1675! Either way, you're making a great choice!!!

2 June 2012, 09:55 AM	#25
xela "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Singapore Posts: 110	That 5513 is nicer out of the 2, except the pearl is lumi instead of tritium.. Go for 5513..

2 June 2012, 10:09 AM	#26
clarkhardball "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jake Location: Manila Posts: 323	Yeah I noticed the pearl too. Is the insert "period correct"? Is it supposed to be fat font insert or this is right?

2 June 2012, 10:37 AM	#27
gregorpal "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Myplaceintheworld Posts: 335	5513, simple, clean, you´ll just love it...

2 June 2012, 11:04 AM	#28
bluemartinifan "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: Russ Location: Dallas Texas Watch: 5513 Posts: 2,124	Are the case and lugs on the 5513 fatter and less polished? The crown guards on the 5513 (hard to tell w/ the pics) look fatter and flatter at the top (good). I am of course a 5513 fan due to the pure iconic look...

2 June 2012, 11:09 AM	#29
clarkhardball "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jake Location: Manila Posts: 323	Here's the 5513 in detail lemme know what you guys think - http://www.ebay.com/itm/270984037155...t_18688wt_1219

2 June 2012, 11:12 AM	#30
clarkhardball "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Jake Location: Manila Posts: 323	The 1680 has a much fresher look since I have seen it in the metal but it did undergo some light polishing during service. Lugs still retain some edges. The 5513 on the other hand according to the seller is untouched. It looks it :))

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)