"never restored" #5512, 1961 model!

[rolexguy777]

hi guys,,, just picked up this #5512, 1961 submariner,, and in all my years of collecting "sports rolexes",, ive never owned this watch? has anyone in the "crew here",, seen this 'same style'? its a 661thousand ser#/ with the #1560,, 25j chrometer movement,,,,,and the top,,, "its never been restored"!!? cleaned a few times,,(back scratch dates?) but orignal hands, and that "melted lum'?!
any hints? $$
rolexguy777

[Michael M.]

Well first off, the dial is Refinished. But the rest looks original.

[Kingair]

Originally Posted by Michael M.

Well first off, the dial is Refinished. But the rest looks original.

x 2

HANW

[Keeperoftime]

Originally Posted by Michael M.

Well first off, the dial is Refinished. But the rest looks original.

+1

Appears re-finished. The dial font is off (200m = 660ft especially). Is the insert original or a later replacement-thoughts?
In any event, still a very nice piece! I hate being a stickler but if someone told you it was 100% original you should know.

Welcome to TRF!

[rolexguy777]

well i know the "lum" was added, over re-top,, that i 'guessed'?,,, "pillar track",,and writing your saying is refinished? hum,,? really?
fred

no,,, no one has told me 100%,,, i figured out the "add to lum" thousand years ago! but really,,,, pillar track ring? swiss marked correct? spotting on dial, AND WARE and scratches are correct for time use!,, shows non re-done to me? i was more in line,, with the "strange M in meter/ and FT"?,,being that it was first year production #5512,,, was there a alter in that format? ive had many gilt dial #5512,s,, with open track markers,, and early GMT's with underline track, but two in "one" as this watch? hummm,,
in 40years i pretty much have seen it all in re-done dials? this one is strange,,if its 're-done'?,,,(the writing),, i need to go back to vintage buying school again i guess?
this one just has that feel,,, of not have gone there?
i may be wrong i guess?? thanks kids,,,,,,,,fred

[RC2]

Guess it holds true to unpolished. Rich

[SubKing]

All of the above.

[Lol-x]

It looks to me like the m for meters and ft for feet on the dial have been repainted, but I could well be wrong, as there are other lettering that looks consistent with a vintage dial typeface.

The dial does look like it has been re-lumed with the lume running over the marked indicies, this is very un-rolex-like if you know what I mean.

[RLX-lvr]

The dial has completely been refinished, and relumed. Does not even look close to an original.
If you have doubts check the VRF dial archive.
I own a 5512 from 1.61 66x,xxx and there can be at least 3 different dials fitted to the watch, and this dial is not one of them. Never was because it has be redone, reprinted, repainted, and relumed.

[Kingair]

To tell the truth . . . if it was a watch that I received from my dad I would be happy.
But buying this one . . . ?
Than it has to be at a ridiculous low price

Just my .02

HANW

[azguy]

I'm no expert and this thread has highlighted just how little I know...always a great learning experience on TRF

[rolexguy777]

well "thank you guys",,, so much for your input on this watch! after spending many hours "researching" this beast,, i so agree about the "white" lettering on this face is so not right!! meter and foot,,,"bad",,,,or not right so far as known!?
my draw back is the "gilt" writting and track ring! pillars are correct, gilt lettering is pillar correct? rolex signature,crown,, submariner,,writting is all,,correct,, so,,,,, why and the heck would there be "two differant" type styles, done at "different times" on this face? since its the first "registered chronometer" model, was the "white lettering added after escapement registration"??? this dial if "all redone"? was done well before the 1980's, before that re-done dials were done "very bad"! after the rise in 'rolex prices' starting at about 1983 on, did it become more of a art form!? remember #6263's/#6265's as a example were under $500. then!! i know i had about 12 of them in my store, and at $600each,,with box and papers was to much then!! so,,,what's a "3/4" or 1/2 "right" #5512 face and great orignal watch worth? again,, under coat spotting on this face takes it back at least "50years"!! that's my dilemma?

i'll leave it here,,, thanx's everyone on responce!
"its nice to be back"!!! fred

[mdw3]

If you really want to know exactly what happened to this dial, here goes:

When a technician was in the process of cleaning off (removing) the original radium markers from the dial in order to embark upon a relume, he also (probably inadvertently) removed the top clear-coat lacquer from the dial surface. In so doing, the printing in silver, which included the depth rating and the chronometer certification both, was removed, as all silver printing in these dials is completed in the final stage in the production of these dials (and is stamped ON TOP OF the final clear-coat). The black dial surface and the gilt printing remained undisturbed, as these use a different enamel-like technique which is not affected by most solvents (like those used to remove the top clear layer). After applying the new lume (which we can see clearly in the photos), the technician then reprinted the depth rating and chronometer certifications as best he was able, in a style approximating the original printing. Hence you have it, your not-quite-refinished, but definitely-not-all-original dial. This is not the first time I have seen this.

Michael

[HL65]

Originally Posted by mdw3

If you really want to know exactly what happened to this dial, here goes:

When a technician was in the process of cleaning off (removing) the original radium markers from the dial in order to embark upon a relume, he also (probably inadvertently) removed the top clear-coat lacquer from the dial surface. In so doing, the printing in silver, which included the depth rating and the chronometer certification both, was removed, as all silver printing in these dials is completed in the final stage in the production of these dials (and is stamped ON TOP OF the final clear-coat). The black dial surface and the gilt printing remained undisturbed, as these use a different enamel-like technique which is not affected by most solvents (like those used to remove the top clear layer). After applying the new lume (which we can see clearly in the photos), the technician then reprinted the depth rating and chronometer certifications as best he was able, in a style approximating the original printing. Hence you have it, your not-quite-refinished, but definitely-not-all-original dial. This is not the first time I have seen this.

Michael

Well said Michael...

[rolexguy777]

makes "perfect sence',,,why the chezzy 'meter'/foot/!!
you hit it michael! it just kicks me to try to figure out why "things" are as they are in these vintage rolex's! back when ever that was done/ (re-lume)
that poor watchmaker was out that day-pay!$

For me,,, its more then money!,,, from now on "this dial will be with this watch", why remove it since 1/2 is "still orignal"!? in fact maybe many years from now this too shall be some kind of 'wierd dial add that will be worth more money' for what was done? who knows,, we that collect these things, and try to stay "pure" in originality"! "that's by the way that keeps the "numbers" up$$$! vintage collectors have to keep things stright, storys right! it's what
makes this all worth doing! its like adding a "new motor" to a 1955 chev. 210 bel air,,,its ok,, it drives nice,, value still there and all. the orignal motor would have been nice, but its still cool!

(as long as the old "AM" radio is still working!!),,,haha

michael,,, you are a "dial god kid"!! thanx
fred

[RLX-lvr]

Originally Posted by SteelerFan65

Well said Michael...

Bang on, Micheal. Well said.

[mike]

Originally Posted by mdw3

If you really want to know exactly what happened to this dial, here goes:

When a technician was in the process of cleaning off (removing) the original radium markers from the dial in order to embark upon a relume, he also (probably inadvertently) removed the top clear-coat lacquer from the dial surface. In so doing, the printing in silver, which included the depth rating and the chronometer certification both, was removed, as all silver printing in these dials is completed in the final stage in the production of these dials (and is stamped ON TOP OF the final clear-coat). The black dial surface and the gilt printing remained undisturbed, as these use a different enamel-like technique which is not affected by most solvents (like those used to remove the top clear layer). After applying the new lume (which we can see clearly in the photos), the technician then reprinted the depth rating and chronometer certifications as best he was able, in a style approximating the original printing. Hence you have it, your not-quite-refinished, but definitely-not-all-original dial. This is not the first time I have seen this.

Michael

Thank you Michael.

[harry in montreal]

fred, "i like you" and your watch. keep it "as is".

[dysondiver]

im a 61 vintage myself ,,, so id be happy if i looked as good .
enjoy it for what it is , theres a lot of life left in a 61 model ,,,

[rolexguy777]

"but im looking over at "e-bay' today? (i try not too??) but what the heck,,so i type in 'rolex #5512 gilt',,and 4 watches come up,,, one of the "four" is a watch out of san francisco? the "BROWNISH" color III/59 #5512 one! and im looking at that dial,,"very cool watch and all",,BUT,,,,by going with what i was told by my "new dial god michael",,(my hero by the way)... looking at that 'bad laquar cracking', and faded out "GILT",,but why in heck does the
"silver depth and cronometer" section look like a "red dress in church"? was there "another" goofy tech out there that did a 'bo-bo' and this guy or pre-owner sent it to someone to have that "outside" font re-done back to rolex font look? at that "$29,000.00" price tag??? hummmmm

i may be wrong??,, and i don't know for sure,, but what i now know to be so,, that "layer" of paint should be "worse" then the laquar thats damaged and the "gilt thats faded'? to much "good scotch" maybe??

again,,,,"i don't have any proof of that,,and im sure im wrong"????

fred

fred

[Kingair]

Originally Posted by rolexguy777

"but im looking over at "e-bay' today? (i try not too??) but what the heck,,so i type in 'rolex #5512 gilt',,and 4 watches come up,,, one of the "four" is a watch out of san francisco? the "BROWNISH" color III/59 #5512 one! and im looking at that dial,,"very cool watch and all",,BUT,,,,by going with what i was told by my "new dial god michael",,(my hero by the way)... looking at that 'bad laquar cracking', and faded out "GILT",,but why in heck does the
"silver depth and cronometer" section look like a "red dress in church"? was there "another" goofy tech out there that did a 'bo-bo' and this guy or pre-owner sent it to someone to have that "outside" font re-done back to rolex font look? at that "$29,000.00" price tag??? hummmmm

i may be wrong??,, and i don't know for sure,, but what i now know to be so,, that "layer" of paint should be "worse" then the laquar thats damaged and the "gilt thats faded'? to much "good scotch" maybe??

again,,,,"i don't have any proof of that,,and im sure im wrong"????

fred

fred

So what do you mean finally ?

Thanks

[rolexguy777]

Thinking out loud i guess,,,??

so,,,hey,,, "that gold and silver prices'?? wow,,,, guess we will be trading soon in 'metal'? but when im buying a "cosmograph",, the darn stuff always falls out of my 'wallet'??

someone needs to come up with something "lighter in weight" to trade with??


gezzzzz,,,
fred

[toph]

Originally Posted by rolexguy777

Thinking out loud i guess,,,??

so,,,hey,,, "that gold and silver prices'?? wow,,,, guess we will be trading soon in 'metal'? but when im buying a "cosmograph",, the darn stuff always falls out of my 'wallet'??

someone needs to come up with something "lighter in weight" to trade with??


gezzzzz,,,
fred

they are called bank notes

[rolexguy777]

" i stopped trading in those things "years ago'!!"
(well when they stopped useing butterfly 'ink' to stamp the notes with?)

our goverment "promises" to stand behind these notes i see? wow,,,,,,,,,,,,

i "feel so safe with that thought'!!?

guess i should sell all these old "watches" after all now?!!

ugggggg?? being silly,,,, "great scotch i guess"!!
fred

[harry in montreal]

"what's up with the quotes?"

I love it

[rolexguy777]

",,anyway,,," im trading my 1971 #1675, with "punch papers" box and books and tags,,,,,,,, for a 1972 chev P.U. with 60k on it?? i hope im ok???

I'll send photos of both later tonight with new "header",,,, since those darn 'bank notes' are goofy and all,, i thought it might be a good trade? since you "canada folks" are keeping all that "frac oil" up there and all? gezzzzzzz???

well,,, im safe i "guess" if theres a "EMP", its still will be running they say<< with this non-computer truck i guess?? (1979 and older you know!!),,, haha
( i wonder if the "1979 and older" rolexes will still be running after??) hummmm
fred

[harry in montreal]

i am in quebec. the only pipes we have around here are for crack. we have hydro electric power. that said, its at $6 a gallon here with our insane taxes. that 71 350 looks thirsty. i would still love it though. i hope you still have nice flowers in portland.

[harry in montreal]

Fred, i think you need to google "Keystone pipeline". i believe its already "pumpin" oil from Alberta to Illinois. I understand its a big political issue that seems to be stalled on the desk of "the President"