ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Initial_J · 26 November 2021, 05:52 AM

What do people think? Bezel’s pretty beat up but I think it looks pretty cool. No clue if this is natural or not…

Dan S · 26 November 2021, 06:54 AM

It's too far gone for me, and also not correct for the watch IMO.

Initial_J · 26 November 2021, 06:58 AM

What’s not correct about it (other than being totally beat up)?

alwayshere · 26 November 2021, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Initial_J

What’s not correct about it (other than being totally beat up)?

era of the watch vs. the bezel insert font / style isn't correct.

thats a meters first matte dial 5513 with a later insert it would appear.

baumare · 26 November 2021, 02:01 PM

I believe should mount a "Long 5" insert, and those are not cheap to buy.
The present insert would bugging me every time I look at the watch...

Initial_J · 26 November 2021, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baumare

I believe should mount a "Long 5" insert, and those are not cheap to buy.
The present insert would bugging me every time I look at the watch...

Wasn’t the Long 5 from the gilt era?

swaini3 · 28 November 2021, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Initial_J

Wasn’t the Long 5 from the gilt era?

Long 5's are from 60 -69 plus / minus ofc.

The color, fading, aging is nice but the missing bits would annoy me too.

karleone · 27 November 2021, 09:09 PM

The insert is cracked it would bother me everytime i look at the watch!

rootbeer7 · 27 November 2021, 10:12 PM

Separating the era from the question of original. I’d suggest looking at the damage it would appear original. I had a 1665 who’s bezel has started to degrade like that.

Dan S · 28 November 2021, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rootbeer7

Separating the era from the question of original. I’d suggest looking at the damage it would appear original. I had a 1665 who’s bezel has started to degrade like that.

What do you mean by original? The insert is not original to the meters-first dial, as mentioned above. If you are saying that the damage may have happened naturally, then I agree.

rootbeer7 · 28 November 2021, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan S

What do you mean by original? The insert is not original to the meters-first dial, as mentioned above. If you are saying that the damage may have happened naturally, then I agree.

Exactly this.

26 November 2021, 05:52 AM	#1
Initial_J "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 73	Real patina on 5513 bezel insert? What do people think? Bezel’s pretty beat up but I think it looks pretty cool. No clue if this is natural or not… Attached Images

26 November 2021, 06:54 AM	#2
Dan S 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 6,289	It's too far gone for me, and also not correct for the watch IMO. __________________ @oldwatchdan on IG

27 November 2021, 10:12 PM	#9
rootbeer7 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: london Posts: 6,157	Separating the era from the question of original. I’d suggest looking at the damage it would appear original. I had a 1665 who’s bezel has started to degrade like that. __________________ @imrootbeer7

26 November 2021, 06:58 AM	#3
Initial_J "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 73	What’s not correct about it (other than being totally beat up)?

26 November 2021, 02:01 PM	#5
baumare "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2018 Real Name: mario Location: NY-USA Watch: Rolex 1675/8 Posts: 535	I believe should mount a "Long 5" insert, and those are not cheap to buy. The present insert would bugging me every time I look at the watch...

27 November 2021, 09:09 PM	#8
karleone "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Dayona Posts: 2,269	The insert is cracked it would bother me everytime i look at the watch!

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