Quality questions on older Rolex Models

[JJack]

I am thinking of buying an older 1950s, 1960s or 1970s model Rolex, but I am not sure what to expect of the quality. I have never handled a Rolex in real life, I am used to high quality watches made from Tag Heuer, Logines, and Movado all built within the past 20 years. I know modern Rolexes are made only from super high quality materials, but times have changed, maybe older Rolexes weren't built as nice?

1. Does a 40-50 year old Rolex build quality compare to newer (albeit cheaper) watches?

2. Are the materials used 50 years ago comparable to what we have now?

3. How have quality standards changed over the years for high-end watches?

Thanks in advance :)

[andromeda160]

At this point your just going to have to go to a vintage dealer and get a feel for yourself, the build quality is great, I don't know anything that says more about the reliability and robustness other than most 40-50 yr old Rolexes are still on peoples wrists today. With proper maintenance they will easily outlive you

[harry in montreal]

Don't buy an older watch and expect chronometer timing. None of my rolex and Tudors is very accurate. Even when new I adjusted them periodically. I am sure someone will reply that I should spend $650 every 5 years on a rolex overhaul. That is not reality. The reality is that I don't mind adjusting them every few days. Just like I tinker with my old car

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

Don't buy an older watch and expect chronometer timing. None of my rolex and Tudors is very accurate. Even when new I adjusted them periodically. I am sure someone will reply that I should spend $650 every 5 years on a rolex overhaul. That is not reality. The reality is that I don't mind adjusting them every few days. Just like I tinker with my old car

Depends on the watch, my Oyster precision was never chronometer rated, and currently keeps time within chronometer specs. As long as they have good amplitute and little to no beat error there shouldn't be a reason they can't be regulated well within the chronometer specs.

[Toronto Soup King]

My Rolexes were all made between 1960 and 1985, no problems with any of them but then Shane Ede is just around the corner if something comes up.

[joe100]

I'm well within COSC on my GMT from '86

[R.W.T.]

In my humble opinion....modern Movado, Tag Heur, Longines watches...are not even the quality of their OWN vintage watches what to say of comparing to a vintage Rolex.

While I might I might concede that case and bracelet and dial/hand manufacturing processes have evolved over time and the aesthetics may be very accurate and cookie cutter perfect compared to a vintage piece, most of these watches are powered by ETA contract movements or now their Swiss copy as the patent on the ETA calibres has expired. The movement in and of itself is a very good functioning movement...is it the quality of a Rolex....hardly. It's just not, and anybody who says otherwise is anti Rolex, wishful thinking or just deluded.

All one has to do is handle one...and then pick up a 1570 or 1030 or even an older 775 Rolex and it's just a different world.

Once again I'm not bashing those other movements. It's a great time keeper and it MAY keep better time than a given vintage Rolex movement but it never started out life as the same quality. Being a contract movement they come in various grades of finish. The more expensive versions will be very nicely executed with nice damascene and plate finish and the like but the design is not really much different. It's very hard to explain the difference unless you have worked on them. I like the ETA because it works very well and parts are pretty available. That is also why everyone used it. You could buy them and install the in your watch brand and have a good solid Swiss mechanical at a great price. They go pretty much forever with little maintenance except the reversers are prone to wear.

Rolex is a different league. JMHO.

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

Don't buy an older watch and expect chronometer timing. None of my rolex and Tudors is very accurate. Even when new I adjusted them periodically. I am sure someone will reply that I should spend $650 every 5 years on a rolex overhaul. That is not reality. The reality is that I don't mind adjusting them every few days. Just like I tinker with my old car

This would be true of any watch.

The key is consistency of wear. Our problem is we have too many watches and we don't wear them regularly.

It's like a Jaguar...if you keep it covered up in your garage and drive it once a month...it's not gonna work well. If you drive it like a FORD it will probably be as trouble free as the next car.

If you set a Rolex up properly and wear it as your only watch it will be as consistent if not more in time keeping than any other watch made.

This is ESPECIALLY true the more modern calibre you get. The 30xx series and up...are brutally accurate when worn consistently.

[ADINVA]

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

This would be true of any watch.

The key is consistency of wear. Our problem is we have too many watches and we don't wear them regularly.

It's like a Jaguar...if you keep it covered up in your garage and drive it once a month...it's not gonna work well. If you drive it like a FORD it will probably be as trouble free as the next car.

If you set a Rolex up properly and wear it as your only watch it will be as consistent if not more in time keeping than any other watch made.

This is ESPECIALLY true the more modern calibre you get. The 30xx series and up...are brutally accurate when worn consistently.

Learn something new today.

[R.W.T.]

That has been my personal experience.

That is what I am drawing from.

It is especially true with the older calibers. I find that if I fine regulate even say my 6610, and wear it as a daily driver for a month it can be almost perfect running for days without any noticeable gain or loss. Put it in the safe let it wind down start it up again after a month and wear it for a few days...the regulation may not be as accurate as before.

The 30xx and later calibres don't show as much variance in that respect. They tend to hold better while sitting up for me.

Right now I'm running a 1575 GMT from 66 at + 1 second a day...over 20 days.

It bugs me because I didn't tighten the cannon pinion before I put the dial and hands on, trusting that it was probably okay and so it's not tight enough to hack and so I have to wait 60 days for it to be on time or let it run down :-)

[harry in montreal]

Rwt, my new sea dweller in 2005 was never that accurate. You are good! I rather not open up the watches and just live with a bit of adjusting. If I was a watchmaker or richer this would be different for sure

[pyac76]

I'm wearing a 5513 Sub from '77 that was serviced last winter and it runs well within COSC specs. I also have Datejust 16014 from '83 and I just wound it to see how it was keeping time and it too is well within COSC specs and it has not been serviced since 07. I feel the vintage Rolexes keep fabulous time

[RazorD]

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

In my humble opinion....modern Movado, Tag Heur, Longines watches...are not even the quality of their OWN vintage watches what to say of comparing to a vintage Rolex.

Very true point IMO.

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

Rwt, my new sea dweller in 2005 was never that accurate. You are good! I rather not open up the watches and just live with a bit of adjusting. If I was a watchmaker or richer this would be different for sure

Haha...well it is MY watch :-)

The benefit there comes from being persistent and being the one who is going to wear it all the time and having the tools in your own hand.

How I wear someone else's watch and how close I can get it when they in turn wear it are a little different for obvious reasons. I do try :-)

Also after 50 years all watches are not created equal. Very often some will turn out better than others.

This one is particularly good :-)

[brandrea]

The biggest difference is in material when Rolex changed to 904L stainless steel. I'm not sure what year that happened, somewhere in the 90's I believe.

As for accuracy my 5513 is not chronometer rated, and yet keeps more accurate time than my DJ2 or my SD which are both chronometer rated.

They are mechanical watches and as some have stated require regulating from time to time.

[Wesley Crusher]

The build quality of vintage Rolex cannot match modern Rolex. Having said that, if these watches have made it 50+ years, that should tell you that Rolex, new or old, builds watches to last a lifetime.

[omitohud]

I luv showing this pic. A picture is worth a thousand words. SD from 77.




I blame it on the autoconnect.

[JJack]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

The build quality of vintage Rolex cannot match modern Rolex. Having said that, if these watches have made it 50+ years, that should tell you that Rolex, new or old, builds watches to last a lifetime.

So you are saying even 50 years ago Rolex built extremely high quality watches? That is good to know, and what I wanted to hear. I was worried that Rolex may have been built with lower standards back then and only be valuable today because of their current quality. Am I incorrect in thinking that?

Originally Posted by brandrea

The biggest difference is in material when Rolex changed to 904L stainless steel. I'm not sure what year that happened, somewhere in the 90's I believe.

As for accuracy my 5513 is not chronometer rated, and yet keeps more accurate time than my DJ2 or my SD which are both chronometer rated.

They are mechanical watches and as some have stated require regulating from time to time.

As long as I can fine tune an old Air King or Oysterdate to within 1 minute a day I will be happy. And I hope the build quality matches that of newer watches.

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

This would be true of any watch.

The key is consistency of wear. Our problem is we have too many watches and we don't wear them regularly.

It's like a Jaguar...if you keep it covered up in your garage and drive it once a month...it's not gonna work well. If you drive it like a FORD it will probably be as trouble free as the next car.

If you set a Rolex up properly and wear it as your only watch it will be as consistent if not more in time keeping than any other watch made.

This is ESPECIALLY true the more modern calibre you get. The 30xx series and up...are brutally accurate when worn consistently.

The main reason I created this thread was because I was worried perhaps Rolex had different LOWER quality standards back 50 or so years ago. It seems everyone agreee this is not the case and the build quality and accuracy is still considered top-notch even to this day. As long as it is reasonable to exepect a "low grade" vintage Rolex to keep good daily time and be built I will be happy

[JJack]

Originally Posted by harry in montreal

Don't buy an older watch and expect chronometer timing. None of my rolex and Tudors is very accurate. Even when new I adjusted them periodically. I am sure someone will reply that I should spend $650 every 5 years on a rolex overhaul. That is not reality. The reality is that I don't mind adjusting them every few days. Just like I tinker with my old car

I am planning on buying a 40-50 Rolex Oysterdate or Air King as a daily wearer (or perhaps what some refer to as "beater"). I would love to spend about $1,000 or so, and I hope I can get it serviced every 4-5 years at about $300 from a private watchmaker.

Is it not reasonable to expect accuracy within 1 minute every day? What is considered "very accurate" for a vintage Rolex. I keep all my new watches accurate within 1 minute, I don't care about seconds.

[Fredrik]

Originally Posted by JJack

Is it not reasonable to expect accuracy within 1 minute every day? What is considered "very accurate" for a vintage Rolex. I keep all my new watches accurate within 1 minute, I don't care about seconds.

My oldest vintage Rolex is from 72-73, just over 40 years old. Before service it was +15s/month. I had it serviced this winter and now it has settled for approximately +30s/month, that is +1s/day. All my Rolexes from the 70s are within a minute fast per month. They all have 1570 movements. I had them regulated to run this accurate by watchmakers(actually, three different...). I might need to have them regulated again in a few years if I want them to stay that accurate.

As long as it runs consistently and your wear patterns are consistent you can have it regulated to run a few seconds fast/slow per day in my experience.

[JJack]

Originally Posted by Fredrik

My oldest vintage Rolex is from 72-73, just over 40 years old. Before service it was +15s/month. I had it serviced this winter and now it has settled for approximately +30s/month, that is +1s/day. All my Rolexes from the 70s are within a minute fast per month. They all have 1570 movements. I had them regulated to run this accurate by watchmakers(actually, three different...). I might need to have them regulated again in a few years if I want them to stay that accurate.

As long as it runs consistently and your wear patterns are consistent you can have it regulated to run a few seconds fast/slow per day in my experience.

Thanks for your reply! But am I correct in thinking that the 1570 is a certified movement? The "low end" vintage Air King, Oysterdate, and similar models don't have certified movements. Will those still be accurate?

Thank you

[U5512]

Originally Posted by JJack

Thanks for your reply! But am I correct in thinking that the 1570 is a certified movement? The "low end" vintage Air King, Oysterdate, and similar models don't have certified movements. Will those still be accurate?

Thank you

The vintage Air-King will have the 1520 movement, which is the same movement used in fabulous Submariner 5513. This movement is quite accurate and if it is serviced and regulated well, it will keep time to COSC.

The Oysterdate is a manual wind watch, so it does not have an automatic movement like an Air-King. Here is a shot of my vintage 1987 Air-King (ignore the scratches on the acrylic crystal).

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by JJack

Thanks for your reply! But am I correct in thinking that the 1570 is a certified movement? The "low end" vintage Air King, Oysterdate, and similar models don't have certified movements. Will those still be accurate?

Thank you

Theoretically the 1570 is a better movement with the Breguet overcoil hairspring and free sprung balance system.

All of that being said....the 1520 very often will rival it for time keeping.

Certified or not.

The 1520 is a great movement.

The 1210-1225 manual wind movements are GREAT movements...

There is no worry.

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by JJack

I am planning on buying a 40-50 Rolex Oysterdate or Air King as a daily wearer (or perhaps what some refer to as "beater"). I would love to spend about $1,000 or so, and I hope I can get it serviced every 4-5 years at about $300 from a private watchmaker.

Is it not reasonable to expect accuracy within 1 minute every day? What is considered "very accurate" for a vintage Rolex. I keep all my new watches accurate within 1 minute, I don't care about seconds.

You will not FIND a 40-50 OysterDate or Air King because they didn't exist.

Move that up a decade.

The calendar wasn't even introduced on the DateJust or what became the Datejust until 1945.

[R.W.T.]

"The main reason I created this thread was because I was worried perhaps Rolex had different LOWER quality standards back 50 or so years ago. It seems everyone agreee this is not the case and the build quality and accuracy is still considered top-notch even to this day. As long as it is reasonable to exepect a "low grade" vintage Rolex to keep good daily time and be built I will be happy"

Rolex built THE FIRST WRISTWATCH WITH CHRONOMETER CERTIFICATION.

That right there...should give a hint.

Now many companies built very good watches in the golden era of mechanical watchmaking.

Rolex was the one pushing everyone to build better watches.

They built the first functioning full rotor automatic watch...and NOT for the convenience of not having to manually wind it but because of the ACCURACY added by having more constant tension on the mainspring. When a watch is fully wound manually, the balance will have a greater amplitude or degree of swing. This, all other factors being equal, will cause the watch to run slower because the seconds tic off slower with the wider swing. As the watch mainspring winds down the amplitude lessens because the power of the spring is less, causing the seconds to click off faster. This results in an overall time discrepancy between winds. A "sweet spot" has to be chosen so the watch will perform over several days gaining and losing at various times to have an average or mean variation of a small amount.

The automatic winding was able to have the mainspring tension remain fairly constant for the better part of the day....adding in overall accuracy of timing.

Rolex Chronometers were adjusted to 6 positions and 2 types of climate in ovens and freezers. Most other watches were "unadjusted" or only regulated for time in their standard dial up position.

Rolex set the standard. Omega wouldn't be in business today if they hadn't been chasing Rolex' tail. For a time they did build more Certified Chronometers than Rolex but they were the only ones to ever come close.

Rolex watches even the early ones post Rebberg were based on Aegler movements but with a varying degree of "finish" depending on their intended use. They are very different feeling watches to work on than other brands. Granted many of them have been abused by lack of service over 70+ years or service by less than brilliant repairmen. Still a good one will keep excellent time. I have bubble backs from the 30's - 40's that keep as good of time as a modern Rolex on my wrist.

It's not the easiest watch to work on. But they have always had a method to their madness and personally I get it. I learned how to work on watches by starting with Rolex. It's like being a Mercedes Mechanic. You can fix a Honda because it's a car but they go together differently...and you'd just prefer not to.

But let's dispel any rumor. Rolex has ALWAYS set the commercial standard for fine Swiss wristwatches. Sure there may be better watches but they weren't commercially as viable. Rolex watches are fine quality...but they are also comparatively bullet proof when compared to their similar counterparts in a given era and that has been the case for a long time.

[R.W.T.]

Also be aware that the standards have tightened over the years.

In the 30's I have a timing certificate for a manual wind Chronometer with one position showing +27 seconds a day.

I believe even into the early 50's +-20 seconds in a position and overall mean variation was +- 20 seconds.

As long as you don't EXPECT it to run better than it was meant to, although they often can, you will be fine.

My recommendation is unless you are a desk surfer...get something with a 635 or higher calibre in an automatic so that it has shock resistance in the balance. That way if you drop it on the tile floor you don't have to put a balance staff in. If you are not hard on watches...then by all means buy whatever appeals to you shock or not.

If you wear it most days it will perform within your expectations.