The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 15 January 2020, 06:15 PM   #1
florian1979
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: austria
Posts: 24
Correct insert for my 5513 Submariner

Hello,

I have a Submariner (serial number 1,99...). Is within this serial range only a mk 2 insert correct, or could I also use a mk 3 insert?

Thank you

Florian
florian1979 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 January 2020, 07:47 PM   #2
athom
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Paris (France)
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by florian1979 View Post
Hello,

I have a Submariner (serial number 1,99...). Is within this serial range only a mk 2 insert correct, or could I also use a mk 3 insert?

Thank you

Florian
I'd say both, "fat font" and "long 5".
athom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2020, 03:33 AM   #3
Racer X
"TRF" Member
 
Racer X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Dave
Location: Unknown
Posts: 977
After spending some time looking into it, it seems to me that the mk2 to mk3 transition occurred somewhere around 1968-9, which is the time period for a 1.9 million sn Rolex. So, I would say either would be valid. In view of that, I'd just go with the insert that you like the most. You're the one who's going to look at it the most and an insert you really like can almost make the watch.

While both the mk2 and mk3 are nice, I prefer the mk3, which looks fatter to me. Also, if you're looking to source an insert, the mk3's are more common and less expensive too.
Racer X is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2020, 04:54 AM   #4
jlovda
"TRF" Member
 
jlovda's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Real Name: John
Location: Midwest
Watch: 5513,1675,216570
Posts: 775
Quote:
Originally Posted by athom View Post
I'd say both, "fat font" and "long 5".
Pleas educate me. Are you saying the "fat font" insert is more formally known as Mk 2? And "long 5" is Mk 3? I believe my 5513, SN 204xxxx, has a fat font insert. (See avatar).

Thanks
jlovda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2020, 05:44 AM   #5
lupus66
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: holland
Posts: 96
Mk 2 and 3 are both more or less fat
Only mk 2 is long 5
Best is a kissing4 long5.
lupus66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2020, 06:47 AM   #6
florian1979
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: austria
Posts: 24
Thank you very much for your answers. I think I will go for a mk3. It seems they are easier to get in a good condition and they are even cheaper;).
florian1979 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 January 2020, 07:10 AM   #7
Tools
TRF Moderator & 2020 Patron
 
Tools's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 37,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by florian1979 View Post
Thank you very much for your answers. I think I will go for a mk3. It seems they are easier to get in a good condition and they are even cheaper;).
A new service insert is even cheaper yet.

There is no law or rule that says you need to run around and find an old insert that may/may not have been on your watch back-in-the-day. They are expendables.
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....)
NAWCC Member
Tools is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright 2004-2019, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.