The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Vintage Rolex Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 4 December 2018, 02:47 AM   #1
powerfunk
"TRF" Member
 
powerfunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Rob
Location: Boston, MA
Watch: 1530
Posts: 3,779
When did Rolex make the first switch from 304L to 316L steel? Was it the 1016?

Many Rolex collectors know about the timelines for the switch from 316L to the 904L currently used today. But it seems like the switch from 304L to 316L wasn't talked about much. Was it the 1960's when Rolex introduced 316L?

I was wondering if perhaps the 1016 was the first model to use 316L, because the 1972 catalog describes it as an "especially tough stainless steel case." What could possibly make it more "tough" than the other Oyster cases? Was it 100% marketing, the switch to 316L, or something else that I'm missing?

powerfunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 December 2018, 03:30 AM   #2
L.K Johnson
"TRF" Member
 
L.K Johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: /
Posts: 1,733
Also interested to know this!
L.K Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4 December 2018, 02:02 PM   #3
ROGERB
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Real Name: Roger
Location: WHITE ROCK BC
Watch: 89 16610, 57 7914,
Posts: 897
Also refer to Sub and Sub date as having "special" stainless steel?

Hmmm
R
ROGERB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 May 2022, 09:58 AM   #4
douglasf13
"TRF" Member
 
douglasf13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 5,615
I think the "special stainless steel case" could mean the switch to 316L from 304L. You'll notice the Tudor Snowflake doesn't say that in its description, and Tudor Subs tend to be a generation behind Rolex Subs in getting new tech. The GMT, which obviously isn't a dive watch, also doesn't have that moniker.

We do have evidence that the 1019 Milgauss was 304L, at some point:

douglasf13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 May 2022, 12:56 AM   #5
powerfunk
"TRF" Member
 
powerfunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Rob
Location: Boston, MA
Watch: 1530
Posts: 3,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
I think the "special stainless steel case" could mean the switch to 316L from 304L. You'll notice the Tudor Snowflake doesn't say that in its description, and Tudor Subs tend to be a generation behind Rolex Subs in getting new tech. The GMT, which obviously isn't a dive watch, also doesn't have that moniker.

We do have evidence that the 1019 Milgauss was 304L, at some point:


Ah, that's helpful. I was entirely missing 304L.
powerfunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30 May 2022, 02:33 AM   #6
Filipćo
"TRF" Member
 
Filipćo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Real Name: Filipe
Location: Lisbon & Wadesdah
Watch: Never too many
Posts: 1,898
With the 168000 (added zero means 904L) so 1984/'85ish

Edited:

More intel below

https://www.keepthetime.com/blog/316...el-in-watches/
Filipćo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
keepthetime , keepthetime.com


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

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


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





Copyright ©2004-2024, 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.