5513 questions, please

[Philip1]

5513, 8,700,000 acrylic crystal.i have a few questions, I am hoping some experts can help. This watch is quite a bit smaller then my 16610 , I thought they both were 40mm . The bracelet and clasp might not be correct, no flip lock, on the clasp, and no divers extension, and the sides of the bracelet are polished, the bezel rotates bi-directional, maybe spring is broken, does this sound like a 1985-1986 5513? Or another Frankenwatch?

[marcusjcw21]

Do you have photos?

[Philip1]

Not sure how to upload pics

[Philip1]

Hope this works 5513 on left

[marcusjcw21]

Looks good to me. The 5513 should have a bi-directional bezel that you depress to turn. When you're not pressing on it, it should stay locked in its position. It should not make a ratcheting noise. Unless I'm mis-reading or misunderstanding something.

[thenewguyguys]

Originally Posted by marcusjcw21

Looks good to me. The 5513 should have a bi-directional bezel that you depress to turn. When you're not pressing on it, it should stay locked in its position. It should not make a ratcheting noise. Unless I'm mis-reading or misunderstanding something.

Hmm, my 5513 isnot like this, I can rotate the bezel without pressing it down?

[marcusjcw21]

Originally Posted by thenewguyguys

Hmm, my 5513 isnot like this, I can rotate the bezel without pressing it down?

That is common. If genuine, it means that there is not enough friction between the bezel retention ring and the bezel or that the bezel spring is flattened and the bezel is always in the down position. You may need a new spring or could have a qualified Rolex watchmaker with the correct tool adjust the bezel so it is tighter to the bezel retention ring. An authorized Rolex repair person can figure it out in less than 5 minutes.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by marcusjcw21

That is common. If genuine, it means that there is not enough friction between the bezel retention ring and the bezel or that the bezel spring is flattened and the bezel is always in the down position. You may need a new spring or could have a qualified Rolex watchmaker with the correct tool adjust the bezel so it is tighter to the bezel retention ring. An authorized Rolex repair person can figure it out in less than 5 minutes.

There is no spring underneath the bezels of the 5513, 5512 or 1665. That's on later uni-directional models, such as the 16610. The bezels on the older models are bi-directional and do not "lock." They stay in place from friction.

[marcusjcw21]

Originally Posted by swish77

There is no spring underneath the bezels of the 5513, 5512 or 1665. That's on later uni-directional models, such as the 16610. The bezels on the older models are bi-directional and do not "lock." They stay in place from friction.

There is a spring - it is a steel washer spring that bends. It provides upward tension on the bezel to keep it locked. When it is pressed down, it flattens and this allows the bezel to be turned in either direction.

[marcusjcw21]

Originally Posted by swish77

There is no spring underneath the bezels of the 5513, 5512 or 1665. That's on later uni-directional models, such as the 16610. The bezels on the older models are bi-directional and do not "lock." They stay in place from friction.

Here is a link that shows the spring I'm talking about - http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53...mtid=824&kw=lg

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by marcusjcw21

there is a spring - it is a steel washer spring that bends. It provides upward tension on the bezel to keep it locked. When it is pressed down, it flattens and this allows the bezel to be turned in either direction.

+1.

[DarthBane]

Both the 5513 and 16610 subs are 40 mm mid cases. The 16610 gives the illusion of being bigger because it uses a 27.3 mm dial compared to the 26.05mm dial of the 5513. The bezel insert on the sapphire sub is narrower as a result.

The 5513 bezel spins in both direction whether you push it down or not. It will just tend to stay in place unless you use mild force to turn it. Theoretically, it should be easier to turn if you depress it but usually the friction washer flattens out over time and should be re-bent periodically.

The correct bracelet is a 93150, but it's possible it could have been replaced with a 78360 or similar bracelet at some point that has no flip lock. Or it's an aftermarket. Pics of the links and the inner clasp will help identify it along with the back of the endlinks

[GeoGio Greece]

Originally Posted by DarthBane

Both the 5513 and 16610 subs are 40 mm mid cases. The 16610 gives the illusion of being bigger because it uses a 27.3 mm dial compared to the 26.05mm dial of the 5513. The bezel insert on the sapphire sub is narrower as a result.

The 5513 bezel spins in both direction whether you push it down or not. It will just tend to stay in place unless you use mild force to turn it. Theoretically, it should be easier to turn if you depress it but usually the friction washer flattens out over time and should be re-bent periodically.

The correct bracelet is a 93150, but it's possible it could have been replaced with a 78360 or similar bracelet at some point that has no flip lock. Or it's an aftermarket. Pics of the links and the inner clasp will help identify it along with the back of the endlinks

As above

[GeoGio Greece]

Originally Posted by Philip1

5513, 8,700,000 acrylic crystal.i have a few questions, I am hoping some experts can help. This watch is quite a bit smaller then my 16610 , I thought they both were 40mm .

This is original, I am 1st owner.

Originally Posted by Philip1

The bracelet and clasp might not be correct, no flip lock, on the clasp, and no divers extension, and the sides of the bracelet are polished, the bezel rotates bi-directional, maybe spring is broken, does this sound like a 1985-1986 5513? Or another Frankenwatch?

Bracelet NOT correct.

[crowncollection]

Same size it's just a different design


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Philip1]

Originally Posted by GeoGio Greece

As above

I took the bracelet off of the 5513 and the 16610 and measured both, the 5514 is 2mm smaller then the 16610. I measured the diameter from I between the lugs, 12 and 6 o'clock ,, I'm confused why there would be the difference? I used a micrometer so I think it is relatively accurate . I am concerned of the authenticity of the 5513 seeing the bracelet isn't the correct one for the 5513. Were any of the cases smaller then 40 mm?

[swish77]

Originally Posted by marcusjcw21

There is a spring - it is a steel washer spring that bends. It provides upward tension on the bezel to keep it locked. When it is pressed down, it flattens and this allows the bezel to be turned in either direction.

Ah, just terminology. The "spring" is on later uni-directional bezels. But yes, the washer you're referring to _ I always call it a "ring" _ is on the earlier bi-directional bezels.