1960 Rolex 1016 - At Least I Think It Is - Forensics Appreciated

[speedolex]

First off, let me introduce myself. I've been an avid collector of Rolex timepieces since the early 80's, I own several vintage and new pieces, I've participated in multiple forums over the years, I abandoned the buying-side of the hobby a decade ago due to multiple children that occupied my time and an uptrending career that had me quite busy.

Today I received the first vintage watch I've bought as I get back into horology, a nice and clean Explorer 1016. I did not buy this watch for its historical significance (obviously) but rather as a daily-wearer as I've grown weary of my Sub Date day after day for 10 years and the 1016 is just my favorite watch of all time. I wish Rolex made 1016's to this day. If they did, I'd buy one new. The crisp dial and hands is what drew me to this one.

She is nice and clean and was reasonably priced, has some documentation, and was purchased by my seller in 2011 from a reputable dealer you'd know in the forums.

Here's what I know about the watch. If you can help me understand what I've bought I'd appreciate it:

Serial # On Case: 517xxx
Caseback Marking: 1016
Caseback Marking: I 60
Movement Stamp: 1560
Movement # Stamp: D674xxx
Bracelet: 78360
Ends: 501B

Can any sleuths help me out here? And to avoid the slamming, yes, I understand this isn't an all original 1960 model, far from it. I bought it to wear, and I love it right now for that purpose, but if I've got something valuable if I can track down a few parts that isn't a bad thing.

Thanks in advance.

[michael067]

Serial number dates to 1960 and caseback confirms. Not sure what they currently go for.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by michael067

Serial number dates to 1960 and caseback confirms. Not sure what they currently go for.

Thanks! Should the serial number on the case and the serial number on the movement match?

Not understanding the 517xxx case serial number and the D674xxx movement serial number (if it is a serial number, that is). Should those numbers match or it makes no difference?

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by speedolex

Thanks! Should the serial number on the case and the serial number on the movement match?

Not understanding the 517xxx case serial number and the D674xxx movement serial number (if it is a serial number, that is). Should those numbers match or it makes no difference?

Rolex case SN an movement SNs are independent of each other.

[vintagehartmann]

Nice daily wearer with a replacement service dial and with slightly darker hands, which means the resale value takes a hit if you were going down that route. I am surprised the dome crystal is still installed after a service.

[watchcrank]

This would have been within the "gilt" dial range, Dials with the gold printing. So it has as said above a service dials and hand set.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by vintagehartmann

Nice daily wearer with a replacement service dial and with slightly darker hands, which means the resale value takes a hit if you were going down that route. I am surprised the dome crystal is still installed after a service.

Yes, very happy the dome crystal is still there, wouldn't have bought it otherwise. Gave her the Brasso treatment as soon as I got home and the results are spectacular. Gone are the scuffs and scratches (even the deep ones) and what remains looks brand new.

Originally Posted by watchcrank

This would have been within the "gilt" dial range, Dials with the gold printing. So it has as said above a service dials and hand set.

I guess the good news here is that if in the future I come across dials and hands I can put the watch back to its original state, the case and movement are all proper.

Originally Posted by andromeda160

Rolex case SN an movement SNs are independent of each other.

That's a relief because when I opened the case and saw a different number I thought I'd bought a watch with a case and movement and dial and hands and bracelet that were all from different eras. I knew the dial and hands and bracelet were factory replacements, would have been upset if the movement and the case were mismatched as well.

All in all a great daily wearer, and frankly I'm relieved that the watch isn't a perfect 1960 specimen. I just sold my 1964 Ed White Speedmaster because it was too perfect, I just couldn't wear it every day. This 1016, on the bracelet or on a strap, will get tons of weekly wrist time.

Thanks to all for your help!

[77T]

It's a nice one to own for its simplicity. If you plan to keep it, a few ideas...
Have it serviced since the oils last used may not have been to spec.
Perhaps source some hands that are a closer match to the replacement dial.
And seek a 6636 rivet bracelet and 80 end links that would be era correct (and that bracelet is prolly more comfortable). They can still be found - here's a link to one that sold a couple of years ago: http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=387360

But bottom line, enjoy the old 56 y.o. master for what it is!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lol-x]

It looks to have the original (1560) movement (non-hacking).
I can't tell if it has the original winding rotor (butterfly) as you chopped the photo for the rotor. In many occasions you will find the rotor has been replaced with a modern style rotor. That is not an issue of great significance in the overall scheme of things as in this case the bracelet, dial/hands appear to have been replaced during service.

So it should be a good watch for daily wear, just ensure as previously suggested that it has fresh oils running to ensure minimal wear & tear.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

It looks to have the original (1560) movement (non-hacking).
I can't tell if it has the original winding rotor (butterfly) as you chopped the photo for the rotor. In many occasions you will find the rotor has been replaced with a modern style rotor. That is not an issue of great significance in the overall scheme of things as in this case the bracelet, dial/hands appear to have been replaced during service.

So it should be a good watch for daily wear, just ensure as previously suggested that it has fresh oils running to ensure minimal wear & tear.

Thanks, will do with keeping the oil fresh.

Photo above....is that the butterfly rotor?

[seattleal]

Originally Posted by speedolex

Thanks, will do with keeping the oil fresh.

Photo above....is that the butterfly rotor?

Yes, there were two different rotors now referred to as 'butterfly', and this is one of them.

[droptopman]

Looks great. Super vintage for frequent wear. Congrats and enjoy!

[Sculler22]

Less is more, and the simplicity of your watch is outstanding.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by 77T

It's a nice one to own for its simplicity. If you plan to keep it, a few ideas...
Have it serviced since the oils last used may not have been to spec.
Perhaps source some hands that are a closer match to the replacement dial.
And seek a 6636 rivet bracelet and 80 end links that would be era correct (and that bracelet is prolly more comfortable). They can still be found - here's a link to one that sold a couple of years ago:

But bottom line, enjoy the old 56 y.o. master for what it is!

Thank you, will investigate the 6636 bracelet, if it has that more pronounced crown on the buckle you had me at 'hello'.

That said, I knew I was going to wind up with a 1016 this week and I preordered several straps, got a beautiful Hodinkee Vintage Leather and a few Miltat Horween's that are vintage as well, I'll post some pics when they arrive. The reason I got the 1016 was to take wrist time away from my modern Sub Date which I was wearing way too much, the idea was to put a 1016 on a strap and keep the Sub Date on the bracelet and that would be my cadence.

But the 1016 on the bracelet looks amazing. Now I have a quandary.

Originally Posted by droptopman

Looks great. Super vintage for frequent wear. Congrats and enjoy!

Thanks, it's exactly what I wanted, I don't want to worry about the value or scarcity of my classics, just want to enjoy them.

Originally Posted by Sculler22

Less is more, and the simplicity of your watch is outstanding.

Thank you, the 1016 has long been my fave. Most think Rolex is showy and gaudy, these Explorers are nicely understated and so nicely balanced from a design standpoint, they really ought to consider putting the 1016's dial on a modern 14270 and offer it in the large and smaller sizes, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Until then, it's "Welcome To 1960"

[Lol-x]

I'm assuming the watch has 1016 punched in the side of the case between the lugs

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

I'm assuming the watch has 1016 punched in the side of the case between the lugs

Yes, just too difficult to photograph.

[vintagehartmann]

Honestly I would just keep things as they are and wear it as is. It's a fantastic piece in terms of looks and feel.

My '72 and '86 say hello.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by vintagehartmann

Honestly I would just keep things as they are and wear it as is. It's a fantastic piece in terms of looks and feel.

My '72 and '86 say hello.

Awesome watches! And, finally, you're the person who can answer this question:

Are they the same size? The '86 looks bigger. Is that just the photo or were the later-day cases and bezels larger? Or is the '72 a dome crystal and the '86 the flatter beveled design?

Never fully understood if all 1016's had the same case dimensions. What's the verdict?

[vintagehartmann]

Same size, though the '72 is much more polished than the '86, so maybe it does seem like the latter is larger? I'll make a better comparison when my incoming T22 dome arrives and I've installed it onto the '86. You're right in that the service crystal really makes a difference in how it looks and feels.

Either way, this is a reference I pick when I am not thinking about it too much. It's really one of those if-I-could-only-wear-one-watch pieces that has the perfect size and dial design.

Congratulations on your lovely piece!

[Lol-x]

Here is my 1990 "L" serial 1016.
I love this photo of it

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Here is my 1990 "L" serial 1016.
I love this photo of it

Attachment 719753

Yum, it's what I was looking for for quite awhile, the newest/youngest 1016.

Lucky duck.

[blowfish89]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Here is my 1990 "L" serial 1016.
I love this photo of it

Attachment 719753

L series 1989/90 would be birthyear for me as well

[Marrk]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Here is my 1990 "L" serial 1016.
I love this photo of it

Attachment 719753

That's a beauty, Steve.

[Nobody.Move]

You guys with your 1016s...I'm so jealous!

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by Nobody.Move

You guys with your 1016s...I'm so jealous!

What are you driving? Perhaps you win that one.

[gnuyork]

Originally Posted by Nobody.Move

You guys with your 1016s...I'm so jealous!

+1 - if I can only have one Rolex, this is it.

[roll9]

Those are beautiful watches guys, I'm on the hunt for one currently.

[Nobody.Move]

@speedolex
...a 1978 AMC Pacer. You beat me again!

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by Nobody.Move

@speedolex
...a 1978 AMC Pacer. You beat me again!

Sorry. Do you have 3 homes? You may beat me there.

[waspy1]

Personally I'm very surprised to as a 1016 at first quarter of 1960. I thought they were released a bit later.

I would settle for what it is, I can't imagine you'll find a gilt chapter ring dial with matching hands in the wild.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk