Incoming arrived from Jacek -- 1665

[themaninblack]

I never said it wasn't Luminova, i asked the OP what lead him to conclusion and that I have never seen conclusive proof of Luminova dials that are marked as tritium and showing pictures of dials marked as tritium doesn't prove that they are Luminova. I have only read very speculative views of this but if you guys have conclusive ones, like from someone who has tested the material then great!

[droptopman]

Very nice pair. Makes sense to have one for the safe and one you feel more comfortable wearing more often. Always loved this model with the dome and no cyclops but with a date. Jacek is great to deal with. Congrats on the new acquisition!

As far as luminova service dials being marked t<25, I think we have seen many examples of this over the years.

[theflywrist]

Looks amazing!!! I love it man, congrats.
I totally understand buying another to keep the better and original example from being worn in rougher places.
Personally use my modern BLNR to fit those areas.
Working in the cockpit, it helps as its very hard to get scratched up. In addition to that, swimming, biking, hiking, etc. Never need to worry with it.
Would be more reluctant to take my vintage pieces to such activities myself as well.

Wear in best health!

[Brisman]

Very nice Jason.

👏👏👏👏

[Jfullm42]

Congrats! I was looking at this one too haha

[05carbondrz]

The 1665 is a great Refrence no matter how it's sliced,Nice choice.

[ILuvSubs]

A nice looking SD! Congrats on your daily beater

[sea-dweller]

That's a beauty!

[Vincent65]

Originally Posted by themaninblack

I never said it wasn't Luminova, i asked the OP what lead him to conclusion and that I have never seen conclusive proof of Luminova dials that are marked as tritium and showing pictures of dials marked as tritium doesn't prove that they are Luminova. I have only read very speculative views of this but if you guys have conclusive ones, like from someone who has tested the material then great!

They are new service dials, and there are a lot of them around. Rolex doesn't use Tritium any more. Just accept it. Just because is has a 'T' on the dial, doesn't make it Tritium.

[Vincent65]

Jason - enjoy your new acquisition, mate. This is in no way a judgement, and the watches are obviously yours to do with, whatever you want, but I'm struggling with the logic about it being a safer daily wearer. I get that it's worth considerably less on the market than an all-original vintage model, but if you put that [albeit significant] fact to one side for a moment, if both watches are serviced, pressure-tested and with sound seals, plexi etc. then the actual physical risk of water ingress is exactly the same for each. Applying the 'better safe than sorry' reasoning, it's better to never wear a vintage one, because you could equally bash it on something, drop it etc. and damage it. Is the 'old' one a safe queen now!?

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

They are new service dials, and there are a lot of them around. Rolex doesn't use Tritium any more. Just accept it. Just because is has a 'T' on the dial, doesn't make it Tritium.

I accepted it as a possibility from the start. I asked the question of the OP what lead him and others to believe the dial (and other dials) was Luminova rather than Tritium as they are marked and I posed that question to others as I have only ever heard it as speculation rather than from a definitive source. I still have not been pointed to a definitive source on this. It's useful to read posts if you are going to respond to them, otherwise you are just blowing smoke.

[Boaters]

Originally Posted by themaninblack

I accepted it as a possibility from the start. I asked the question of the OP what lead him and others to believe the dial (and other dials) was Luminova rather than Tritium as they are marked and I posed that question to others as I have only ever heard it as speculation rather than from a definitive source. I still have not been pointed to a definitive source on this. It's useful to read posts if you are going to respond to them, otherwise you are just blowing smoke.

I think your question has been answered as best it can by multiple good folks on this forum. It is no secret that Rolex has been keeping company information close to heart. Instead of repeatedly asking the same question which has been answered as best it can and taking away from the heart of this post. Go do some research and if you can find some good information on this make a post of your own. Otherwise would you please give it a rest! Happy Holidays.

[pablofields]

Originally Posted by themaninblack

I accepted it as a possibility from the start. I asked the question of the OP what lead him and others to believe the dial (and other dials) was Luminova rather than Tritium as they are marked and I posed that question to others as I have only ever heard it as speculation rather than from a definitive source. I still have not been pointed to a definitive source on this. It's useful to read posts if you are going to respond to them, otherwise you are just blowing smoke.

I think the trouble people are having is that you are rejecting several people's personal knowledge of their own dials as "speculation" and rather stridently insisting on a "definitive source." Yet you provide no hint of what you would consider a "definitive source" nor do you provide any links to the discussions or articles you deem "pure speculation."

Jocke's service lume dial in this thread is marked tritium. And there is a link to a well known site referencing the phenomenon as well.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=105622

The picture of the U serial Explorer II glowing like a torch may or not be from what you'd consider a " definitive source" but the owner describes it as luminova and appears to have a good idea of what he's talking about.

[rootbeer7]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

Jason - enjoy your new acquisition, mate. This is in no way a judgement, and the watches are obviously yours to do with, whatever you want, but I'm struggling with the logic about it being a safer daily wearer. I get that it's worth considerably less on the market than an all-original vintage model, but if you put that [albeit significant] fact to one side for a moment, if both watches are serviced, pressure-tested and with sound seals, plexi etc. then the actual physical risk of water ingress is exactly the same for each. Applying the 'better safe than sorry' reasoning, it's better to never wear a vintage one, because you could equally bash it on something, drop it etc. and damage it. Is the 'old' one a safe queen now!?

and that's why mine's an everyday. Congrats it's a beautiful piece

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by pablofields

I think the trouble people are having is that you are rejecting several people's personal knowledge of their own dials as "speculation" and rather stridently insisting on a "definitive source." Yet you provide no hint of what you would consider a "definitive source" nor do you provide any links to the discussions or articles you deem "pure speculation."

Jocke's service lume dial in this thread is marked tritium. And there is a link to a well known site referencing the phenomenon as well.

http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=105622

The picture of the U serial Explorer II glowing like a torch may or not be from what you'd consider a " definitive source" but the owner describes it as luminova and appears to have a good idea of what he's talking about.

Indeed. The article you link fits very neatly into the "speculation" category. I don't want to sidetrack the OP's enjoyment of his purchase any further. This topic may warrant another thread at some time.

[Boaters]

Wow what a beauty Jason. I like the contrast old old and new old so to speak. The patina on the one that was restored is just awesome and the new one with the one you just purchased with the Luminova service dial and insert is one sweet watch you picked a good one my friend big congrats. My 1680 with Luminova service dial and insert say hi.


Happy Holidays

[Vincent65]

Originally Posted by themaninblack

I accepted it as a possibility from the start. I asked the question of the OP what lead him and others to believe the dial (and other dials) was Luminova rather than Tritium as they are marked and I posed that question to others as I have only ever heard it as speculation rather than from a definitive source. I still have not been pointed to a definitive source on this. It's useful to read posts if you are going to respond to them, otherwise you are just blowing smoke.

Good luck finding your definitive source. Most would consider the knowledge and experience found here adequate, and I doubt anyone's going to don their white coat and head to the lab to test the substances... just for you.

They are not Tritium. They are not Tritium. They are not Tritium.

They. Are. Not. Tritium.

[Boaters]

Originally Posted by vincent65

Good luck finding your definitive source. Most would consider the knowledge and experience found here adequate, and i doubt anyone's going to don their white coat and head to the lab to test the substances... Just for you.

They are not tritium. They are not tritium. They are not tritium.

They. Are. Not. Tritium.

+1

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by themaninblack

Indeed. The article you link fits very neatly into the "speculation" category. I don't want to sidetrack the OP's enjoyment of his purchase any further. This topic may warrant another thread at some time.

I am not sure that it does warrant it. Everyone else seems to be on the same page.

Not trying to be an a$$......I am asking with the sincerest interest......do you own both luminova and tritium Rolex watches? I ask because......going back to your original question, there is no doubt about the substance of these hour markers and hands on this 1665 and what makes them glow. I own quite a few Rolex watches....both luminova and tritium models with the different tritium models being at varying levels of decay. With just the basic level of experience, it is ABSOLUTELY obvious of the luminova on this 1665 vs a tritium dial. Call it "speculation" if you will, but what you consider questionable information is considered elementary by most with a little experience.

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by jason71

i am not sure that it does warrant it. Everyone else seems to be on the same page.

Not trying to be an a$$......i am asking with the sincerest interest......do you own both luminova and tritium rolex watches? I ask because......going back to your original question, there is no doubt about the substance of these hour markers and hands on this 1665 and what makes them glow. I own quite a few rolex watches....both luminova and tritium models with the different tritium models being at varying levels of decay. With just the basic level of experience, it is absolutely obvious of the luminova on this 1665 vs a tritium dial. Call it "speculation" if you will, but what you consider questionable information is considered elementary by most with a little experience.

...double triple definitely ABSOLUTELY ... enjoy your new watch

[dera]

I think what themaninblack really is asking is: How can you tell the difference between tritium lume and luminova.
Answer is: the intensity and color are completely different, so yes, you can tell that pretty easily without putting a lab coat on.
Simple duck test will be enough. If it glows like luminova and has the color of luminova, we can pretty safely assume it IS luminova.

[blowfish89]

Congrats, very nice duo!

[dukerules]

I've long thought that a lumi service-dial 1665 could improve on my 16600 as a perfect everyday watch. I'm jealous--congratulations!

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by dukerules

I've long thought that a lumi service-dial 1665 could improve on my 16600 as a perfect everyday watch. I'm jealous--congratulations!

So.......I've been wearing this one since I got it. I also wear my 16600s on bracelet and on strap on a regular basis. Interestingly enough, this one feels like it wears slightly larger due I think to the thickness of the plexi crystal. If the 1665 had a unidirectional bezel, it would be my ultimate watch for certain.

[sgmgolf]

Jason-

Great purchase.....I actually really like the clean white service dial and hands.
Enjoy your watch....I think it's perfect!
Cheers

[skprd13]

Congrats. Jason! Looks like a great daily wearer!

[jamestemroot]

Congrats on your 1665 addition!

[alika]

Congrats!!!!

[pablofields]

More "speculation"?!

Over on VRF: "FS: 1680 Submariner Luminova SWISS T < 25 Service Dial (2 Available). Here is a 1680 Submariner Luminova SWISS T < 25 Matte Service Dial (2 Available) - this is not the later Luminova with SWISS. December 21 2015 at 3:07 P.M."

If that's tritium I'll eat it!

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

Jason - enjoy your new acquisition, mate. This is in no way a judgement, and the watches are obviously yours to do with, whatever you want, but I'm struggling with the logic about it being a safer daily wearer. I get that it's worth considerably less on the market than an all-original vintage model, but if you put that [albeit significant] fact to one side for a moment, if both watches are serviced, pressure-tested and with sound seals, plexi etc. then the actual physical risk of water ingress is exactly the same for each. Applying the 'better safe than sorry' reasoning, it's better to never wear a vintage one, because you could equally bash it on something, drop it etc. and damage it. Is the 'old' one a safe queen now!?

Karl,
Sorry, I never responded to your post. I do get what you are saying, and I agree on the ingress of water issue with both watches. I guess what it boils down to with me is that this new luminova 1665 doesn't have the same 'soul' that the patina'ed 1665 has. I would just be killed if anything happened to my first 1665. I won't be wearing either of these watches in the water, but that is due to the fact that I have no shortage of modern sapphire models to always risk while diving or swimming. The 'old' one comes out for wear for a couple days once a month or so........it gets similar wear to my 116619 WG sub. I do wear my most 'prized' watches less than the ones with no sentimental attachment.