Vintage Tudor 60's Sub - unusual "Oyster Perpetual" text

[scotiasteve74]

So I've been trawling the threads here to find an answer to my question, but I have a friend who has a vintage tudor rose, tropical, but it's unusual:

1. It has the rose but also says "Oyster Perpetual" rather than Prince.
2. I can read a serial number, it may say 7928 but the 9 and 8 are challenging to read. It says "Stainless Steel" above the serial between the lugs.
3. It's well worn - the hands appear to have rubbed off some of the text, maybe corrosion? Glass is not in the best shape, but it has character.
4. Text on Rotor is unusual.

The watch has been owned since new since the mid sixties by the same owner.

Here are the dial pics:
[IMG][/IMG]

[scotiasteve74]

Any ideas?

I'm thinking 62 to 64 7928, tropical, but maybe a prototype or refinished dial?

[offrdmania]

Its only 1 bad pic and maybe it is the pic playing tricks on my eyes, but im going to go out on a limb and say fake. That rehaut is huge! and not right. Also, no Swiss marking among other things. Until you post really clear macro shots of the dial, the back of the watch and the engravings between the lugs; we can only guess.

[linesiders]

Looks like a 64-66 regular crown guard (1960-1963 would be pointed) with a badly refinished dial. Not a prototype. Absolutely certain.

[scotiasteve74]

[scotiasteve74]

So my friend has owned it since new, it was a present from his father from a local jeweller, and I have no doubt of that.

What I found unusual was the missing text - seems to be mechanical caused by the hour hand and tennis ball. It could be corrosion or water ingress and it's well used.

The second hand almost seem too long, extending past the second circle.

I've attached more images, needs to be approved by a moderator.

The model number and case I'm sure are genuine "stainless steel".

The text though - it's set low and spacing is odd, but font is correct.

Also the word perpetual, I haven't seen that anywhere else.

[scotiasteve74]

This is a close of the side of the crown:

[scotiasteve74]

Close up (forgive lighting it was taken outside at night - glass is heavily marked).

[scotiasteve74]

Terrible images I know, but that's an iphone at night!

[scotiasteve74]

Here are another couple - see the Stainless Steel and back "rolex oyster" etc.

It's very worn - hard to see the text.

[1675-David]

Nice insert!

[scotiasteve74]

The insert may be the best bit :D

[offrdmania]

Does that case just have gunk on it or is that brass coming through?

[datejust24]

The insert is indeed a beauty

[ar.parask13]

Originally Posted by offrdmania

Does that case just have gunk on it or is that brass coming through?

Stainless steel makes me think it is just dirt..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[scotiasteve74]

It's just dirt :)

The thing that doesn't make sense to me, is that my friend hasn't refinished the dial since he received it in 64/65.

Is it possible the dial was like that when new, a variation?

Font and colour look right, but it has worn away (water, mechanical, sun?)

The word ROTOR is the correct font but appears very close to the other text and lower, almost as if something was above.

[Mark020]

Dial is definitely not original Rolex/Tudor

[uncleluck]

I find posts like this interesting.

'If' it's true that it's been his since new, how could the dial not be original? But one would imagine there's a couple of situations more likely...

It wasn't brand new and had been refinished when he bought
He forgot he had it serviced 40 years ago and it was replaced

Also it'd be nice to see it out of the case as the crystal could be playing distortion tricks of what's left. I'd like to see that personally.

[scotiasteve74]

Originally Posted by uncleluck

I find posts like this interesting.

'If' it's true that it's been his since new, how could the dial not be original? But one would imagine there's a couple of situations more likely...

It wasn't brand new and had been refinished when he bought
He forgot he had it serviced 40 years ago and it was replaced

Also it'd be nice to see it out of the case as the crystal could be playing distortion tricks of what's left. I'd like to see that personally.

I agree, a tricky one.

His father bought it for him in 64 or 65, if it's the 64/65 7928, I'd imagine it wouldn't have been refinished then at that point.

The dial to me looks the same age and condition of the watch to me. It appears to have been worn off by the hour hand - it follows the pattern of the tennis ball.

The font is identical to every other one I've seen but the spacing is different of the lines. This leads me to think there has been something else on the dial above the text.

Why would the word perpetual be placed on it, that is what bugs me.

The rehault (having seen it in person in detail) looks the same as others.

Second hands however extend beyond the outer circle slightly on the dial.

The serials are there, the crown from above isn't as smooth as others I've seen.

Could it be a one off?

[scotiasteve74]

Ok, so is it 7928 or 7988? Must be 28?

[/url]

[roh123]

It is a 7928 with refinished dial. To me it even looks like it has been refinished as a Rolex Submariner hence the "Oyster Perpetual" text. After it's been refinished something/someone has scratched away paint so you can see the old rose and part of the Tudor "Rotor - Self-Winding".

[scotiasteve74]

Originally Posted by roh123

It is a 7928 with refinished dial. To me it even looks like it has been refinished as a Rolex Submariner hence the "Oyster Perpetual" text. After it's been refinished something/someone has scratched away paint so you can see the old rose and part of the Tudor "Rotor - Self-Winding".

I don't think it has ever been Rolex on the dial - the black is even, it's only the text that has come off. The serial upon closer inspection isn't 7928, it's 798X.

The font of tudor is clear, it's easier to see in person. You can just see the bottom of the characters. This is the top layer of the dial, so not covered by anything. The rose looks genuine and correct it's the top layer.

It doesn't look refinished in person, just very old with wear from the minute hand.

[1675-David]

a nice crisp image of the dial would really help!

[scotiasteve74]

Originally Posted by 1675-David

a nice crisp image of the dial would really help!

I wish! :) It's the only one I took vaguely in focus - glass is pretty marked up

[roh123]

Originally Posted by scotiasteve74

I don't think it has ever been Rolex on the dial - the black is even, it's only the text that has come off. The serial upon closer inspection isn't 7928, it's 798X.

The font of tudor is clear, it's easier to see in person. You can just see the bottom of the characters. This is the top layer of the dial, so not covered by anything. The rose looks genuine and correct it's the top layer.

It doesn't look refinished in person, just very old with wear from the minute hand.

Tudor never used Oyster Perpetual. They used Oyster Prince.

To be honest the Rotor Self-Winding text is also wonky. I don't really know what to think of it with these pics. It is definetely refinished. Would be kind of fun if it initially was a Rolex dial which been refinished to Tudor.. I'm not certain but I believe the feet is different so that's a longshot. It could have been repainted more than once. If it was untouched you would have a swiss marking below 6 oclock.

The case engraving is also odd if it doesn't say 7928. To me it looks like 7928 but I am not the one with it in my hands. Can you see the third number 8 clearly or do you just have a partial? What is the serial on the other side? Have you opened it so you can read the caseback?

[scotiasteve74]

It seems to be a 50XXXX serial - 1965, as best I can make out.

[roh123]

Then it is a 7928. Probably just too worn for you to read the 2.

[1675-David]

Originally Posted by roh123

It is a 7928 with refinished dial. To me it even looks like it has been refinished as a Rolex Submariner hence the "Oyster Perpetual" text. After it's been refinished something/someone has scratched away paint so you can see the old rose and part of the Tudor "Rotor - Self-Winding".

this sounds like the most plausible explanation, perhaps the Tudor text has been exposed by a dragging hour hand, it would be here that the surface of the dial "peaks" so to speak, especially after so much paint has been applied

[scotiasteve74]

So to me the lume looks original, and the TUDOR logo actually looks the same colour, although it could be the light.

It's hard to explain but the dial looks flat, and the hour hand is corroded. My gut is that the hand has been off or the corrosion on the hand (water leak?), has caused this part to be removed, as it's consistent all the way around.

He's certain it came like that when it was purchased and hasn't been refinished.

He thinks that it is an Oyster Perpetual that Tudor made.

I think the dial is old, so if it was refinished, done at or around the time of sale, but why? I don't think it's been painted, it seems original to the eye - bear in mind the glass is very worn.

[scotiasteve74]

It's like being a watch detective here - very fun!