Sad story - advice needed

[CrownMe]

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

I'll swim with any of 'em. Bubblebacks...early oysters...subs...Gmt's Explorers...

I don't swim as a rule...but there is no reason that especially any sport model Rolex should not be as waterproof as it was the day it was made unless there is something physically wrong with some component.

It's what made the damned watch anything we wanted anyway...isn't it? They made their entire reputation on that very facet....the oyster case. What's the point?

Of course I can overhaul the watch myself so it has its plusses but I've never been shy about getting my watch wet. I clean everyone of them everyday that I wear them with soap and water.

Why swim in a vintage watch to begin with?

Seems like common sense to me. To much risk for very little reward. If you want reasons not to swim in vintage watches just search some of the threads on here.

[springer]

Originally Posted by jedly1

if I'm reading right ...you had it fixed two years ago ..and it leaked now...did they fix the stem or do a full service ?....

how do you know , or suppose its not a crack in glass, or a failed back seal and presume its the stem ?

Jed is correct. I just picked-up my 1982 GMT 16750 and the crystal had to be replaced due to severe cracks at the base of the crystal - which were not visible. The top of the crystal looked fine.

[R.W.T.]

I guess I like to live dangerously. Why get out of bed in the morning...something could happen to you on the way to the coffee machine....

[linesiders]

I'm OK swimming with vintage IF properly stripped & serviced with correct parts (service crystals, crowns, etc - not 40 year old NOS). Diving , nosomuch. These are in many cases dive watches.

Not a true irreplaceable classic, but your average sub, sure.

[77T]

Even after a full service and passing a pressure test, the watchmaker will tell you that future waterproofness can not be guaranteed on a vintage watch. Lots of things can happen to change its waterproof status.

[Coldwarvet]

OK, I get it = no more swimming for me and my pepsi. I had managed to not submerge it for several years, just learned a painful lesson yesterday. The ship pack is being overnighted from R-NY, the watch is sealed in a zip lock with a huge bag of desiccant and the stem pulled out overnight, will go to NY overnight tomorrow. The rep there said I should "seal it tight" (wind down crown) and "there would not be a problem." I guess to keep fresh air out, but I'm doing the desiccant thing tonight first.

As new here, I have no idea about the pix - here's a direct link.

http://i.imgur.com/RGCbICe.jpg

If anyone can verify the new stem as being correct/incorrect, I'd appreciate it. Maybe it doesn't matter. But the original that fell off and was lost seemed about half as thick (from inside to outside dimension, and I vaguely remember it felt a bit "curved." Not sure, at all, though.

[adam78]

Here's your pic (I used the icon above "insert image").

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

I'll swim with any of 'em. Bubblebacks...early oysters...subs...Gmt's Explorers...

I don't swim as a rule...but there is no reason that especially any sport model Rolex should not be as waterproof as it was the day it was made.

Except for perished gaskets, disintegrated acrylic, and a few others.

[Coldwarvet]

Gosh, it looks really beat up. Totally revealing photo - guess that's 33 years of "patina."

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Coldwarvet

Gosh, it looks really beat up. Totally revealing photo - guess that's 33 years of "patina."

Looks great to me. Some people on here would kill for that watch.

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Except for perished gaskets, disintegrated acrylic, and a few others.

And that is equally as risky on a new one and those issues are the owner's own fault for not taking care of his watch properly and making sure they are fresh.

The original basic components, case frame, crystal retainer, case tube and crown and caseback are no different than they were when they were new. If new gaskets and plexi are installed properly and it is tested for water resitance and passes it is the same as if it had passed in 19---whatever.

[oinkitt]

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

I'll swim with any of 'em. Bubblebacks...early oysters...subs...Gmt's Explorers...

I don't swim as a rule...but there is no reason that especially any sport model Rolex should not be as waterproof as it was the day it was made unless there is something physically wrong with some component.

It's what made the damned watch anything we wanted anyway...isn't it? They made their entire reputation on that very facet....the oyster case. What's the point?

Of course I can overhaul the watch myself so it has its plusses but I've never been shy about getting my watch wet. I clean everyone of them everyday that I wear them with soap and water.

Walk across a busy freeway.... as long as you're prepared to accept the consequences.
Most component failure is found after the "fact".....

[Jason71]

Unfortunately, RSC will want to replace the dial, hands, and insert. Personally, I would have sent it to an independent like Rik, ABC, or Ridley

To hell with the warranty. I'd be more worried about my watch than $500

[Coldwarvet]

Well, we'll see. I don't see anything wrong with the dial or hands. I'd like a new crystal and to be sure it's the right winding stem, which I'm pretty sure the local guy mis-fitted (and charged my big bucks). He also never regulated the watch, although I asked him to and he said he would.

No more local service for me, and, as I know nothing of the recommended "independents" here, I'll stick with NY. If I'd done so in the first place, I probably wouldn't be having this problem now, unless the leak was something else. We'll see and I'll report back.

I was very impressed with the way the person who took my information has responded, thus far.

[landroverking]

I would send it to Dallas if you are going the RSC route.

[CrownMe]

Originally Posted by 77T

Even after a full service and passing a pressure test, the watchmaker will tell you that future waterproofness can not be guaranteed on a vintage watch. Lots of things can happen to change its waterproof status.

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

And that is equally as risky on a new one and those issues are the owner's own fault for not taking care of his watch properly and making sure they are fresh.

The original basic components, case frame, crystal retainer, case tube and crown and caseback are no different than they were when they were new. If new gaskets and plexi are installed properly and it is tested for water resitance and passes it is the same as if it had passed in 19---whatever.

Read the first quote again please. And its not "equally" risky on a newer sub. I can find a 16610 for 5k while my Red sub cant be found under 10 to 12 k. Were talking collector vintage pieces. not sure what the argument is here....

[77T]

Originally Posted by CrownMe

Read the first quote again please. And its not "equally" risky on a newer sub. I can find a 16610 for 5k while my Red sub cant be found under 10 to 12 k. Were talking collector vintage pieces. not sure what the argument is here....

Kevin
I'm not sure why you find it necessary to police the thoughts of others on the OP's thread - but I did read all the posts prior to expressing my opinion.

I merely pointed out that nobody can guarantee future waterproofness after a service. That applies to vintage or modern Rolexes and whether the service was done two weeks ago or two years ago.

I'm not making an "argument" simply expressing an opinion.

[Coldwarvet]

Originally Posted by landroverking

I would send it to Dallas if you are going the RSC route.

Why?

[CrownMe]

Originally Posted by 77T

Kevin
I'm not sure why you find it necessary to police the thoughts of others on the OP's thread - but I did read all the posts prior to expressing my opinion.

I merely pointed out that nobody can guarantee future waterproofness after a service. That applies to vintage or modern Rolexes and whether the service was done two weeks ago or two years ago.

I'm not making an "argument" simply expressing an opinion.

Paul i was agreeing with u lol i used your quote to make my point.

[77T]

Sorry - I totally misunderstood. Excuse me please.

I get your point now -

[CrownMe]

Originally Posted by 77T

Sorry - I totally misunderstood. Excuse me please.

I get your point now -

no problem buddy. Ive done the same thing in the past.

[SeaAndSky]

Originally Posted by Jason71

Unfortunately, RSC will want to replace the dial, hands, and insert. Personally, I would have sent it to an independent like Rik, ABC, or Ridley

To hell with the warranty. I'd be more worried about my watch than $500

Can't we specify not to replace such things and only have the gaskets and affected movement and stem parts replaced?

[Starbucksboss]

Originally Posted by Beaumont Miller II

I agree. Take it to the AD and insist they send it to the RSC for repair at their cost. Hopefully there was no damage to the dial.

Sadly I think you will waste your time , after two years you have no chance. Save the energy and get it off to the RSC fast as you can.
Bad luck!

[motoikkyu]

Some watches I MAY choose to sell or trade in the dim and distant future. I'm not going to risk one of those in the pool, nor will I pay the extra fees to verify water-proofed-ness when I have them serviced. The pool water is corrosive to skin, not quite as bad as salt water, but quite horrible, why do that to a valued watch? There's a clock on the wall! I have a G-Schlock for clockless pools. If I were going diving in the ocean, I might want my trusty Rolex to help me manage my air. In that case, I'd have it checked if it's been more than 3 years since service, as well as soaping it after salt exposure. When a watch hits "rare" designator, or is not readily replaceable, common sense would suggest rational cost/benefit analysis.

[V.lats97nsx]

Would you still play baseball with Babe Ruths bat? Probably not. Sorry for the crazy example lol.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Coldwarvet]

Well, thanks for the private messages. It will not be going to NY.
Cheers.