Red Sub Thoughts

[Wilddyan]

Hi guys

I am interested in this 1680 Red Sub. I know the hands are replacement but would love to hear your thoughts on the watch...



Just a side note, in regards to the hands, is it easy to change them out or will it be something I have to pay to have done?

[southtexas]

Do you know the watch's serial number? Any more photos you could share?

As to hands, a competent watchmaker can easily add a new set of hands for you. The hard part will be finding a set that matches your patina.

[Wilddyan]

I believe the serial is 2229**5 which is should be circa 1967, I have asked for more pictures, for now the only other is-

[jdmi32]

That serial number, if correct, is a tad early for a feet first dial. Not saying it's wrong for sure, but you should look into it a bit more, IMO.

[Wilddyan]

Thanks- yes seems a little early- if anyone has a good source to look at the linage of the dials I would really appreciate it.

[pdoukas]

It is wrong. Stated serial should be meters first. At this stage id be more concerned about what else has been replaced other than hands, insert and dial. What does the movement look like?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wilddyan]

Haven't seen movement yet.

[southtexas]

doubleredseadweller.com is an incredibly comprehensive site for researching red subs. What, if I may ask, is the price?

[Beaumont Miller II]

There is a Red Sub sticky at the top of this sub forum.
The dial is too early for the serial on the case. I would pass.

[descartes]

I have actually spent a lot of time considering the question of "what are the earliest case numbers in which the Red Sub Mark IV dial began to appear?"

I have a Mark IV dial Red sub which is in a case numbered 2,36X,XXX. I purchased this watch from Matthew Bain, who assured me the dial is original to the case. To confirm this, I researched the archive in the Rolex Serial Number Project archive which is maintained in the Vintage Rolex Forum.

The earliest Mark IV dials appearing in that registry are as follows:

2,355,230 (papers evidencing originality)
2,42X,XXX
2,432,267,
2,437,564
2,451,731

At 2,36X,XXX, my Red Sub is, in fact, within the range of the earliest Mark IV dials listed in the VRF archive, albeit on the early side of the range. (Note that in Delgado's Double Red Sea Dweller site (see sticky that Beaumont references), he estimates that the Mark IV dials started appearing around 2,45X,XXX, although Delgado readily acknowledges in the write up that it is simply an estimate and should not be taken as a bright line. We know, in fact, that his estimate is a bit off because there are many examples in the VRF archive, and others, which show that the Mark IV dials starting appearing a little earlier-- and at least as early as 2,355,230).

The VRF archive also reveals another interesting fact: There is only a single meters first dial which appears after the earliest MIV dialed case, and that meters first dial is in case #2,413,XXX.

As we all know, the Rolex parts bin was not an exact science back then, and the was not a clear line of delineation when certain dials went into certain cases.

All that said, the watch posted by the OP with a case number of 2,229,XXX would be the earliest one I know of (by some 120,000 cases) to have a Mark IV dial. It could be a special watch, because it is the earliest known example, or it could be something else.

[southtexas]

How would "papers evidence originality" of the dial that came on a watch from factory?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[descartes]

It's a fair question. Here is the notation in the archive:

"from owner Nick P; with Certificate of Originality dated 29 September 2000 from James Dowling"

I couldn't tell you who Nick P is, but I assume he was known to the person (Eric Ku?) who created the archive. James Dowling is the author of well known books on Rolex collecting.

[marcello pisani]

case is from the end of 1969 and dial is a blatant later replacement.

[marcello pisani]

Originally Posted by southtexas

How would "papers evidence originality" of the dial that came on a watch from factory?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[descartes]

Marcello,

Do you think the MKIV dial of my watch is not original to the 2,36 X,XXX case, or do you think it is rather one of the fist MKIV dials to appear?

Appreciate your thoughts.

Descartes

[marcello pisani]

Originally Posted by descartes

Marcello,

Do you think the MKIV dial of my watch is not original to the 2,36 X,XXX case, or do you think it is rather one of the fist MKIV dials to appear?

Appreciate your thoughts.

Descartes

in my opinion this dial is not the pristine ;
my " deadline " for mk4 dials is not under 2.4

[descartes]

Interesting, thanks.

If you are correct, is it possible that an "MKIV" dial would have been used as a "service dial" by Rolex in replacement of a Mark II or III dial, or could it have only come from another watch?

[marcello pisani]

Originally Posted by descartes

Interesting, thanks.

If you are correct, is it possible that an "MKIV" dial would have been used as a "service dial" by Rolex in replacement of a Mark II or III dial, or could it have only come from another watch?

are likely ... for ex. dial changed by Rolex in a service a few years after watch production made in 1970.
however these " limits " are not written in stone with a diamond tool as after all cases in the 2.3- 2.4 range have been produced in 1970 so there is a gap of just some months ...

[minimerc]

I have a Mk2 2.46m with double punched.

Originally Posted by descartes

I have actually spent a lot of time considering the question of "what are the earliest case numbers in which the Red Sub Mark IV dial began to appear?"

I have a Mark IV dial Red sub which is in a case numbered 2,36X,XXX. I purchased this watch from Matthew Bain, who assured me the dial is original to the case. To confirm this, I researched the archive in the Rolex Serial Number Project archive which is maintained in the Vintage Rolex Forum.

The earliest Mark IV dials appearing in that registry are as follows:

2,355,230 (papers evidencing originality)
2,42X,XXX
2,432,267,
2,437,564
2,451,731

At 2,36X,XXX, my Red Sub is, in fact, within the range of the earliest Mark IV dials listed in the VRF archive, albeit on the early side of the range. (Note that in Delgado's Double Red Sea Dweller site (see sticky that Beaumont references), he estimates that the Mark IV dials started appearing around 2,45X,XXX, although Delgado readily acknowledges in the write up that it is simply an estimate and should not be taken as a bright line. We know, in fact, that his estimate is a bit off because there are many examples in the VRF archive, and others, which show that the Mark IV dials starting appearing a little earlier-- and at least as early as 2,355,230).

The VRF archive also reveals another interesting fact: There is only a single meters first dial which appears after the earliest MIV dialed case, and that meters first dial is in case #2,413,XXX.

As we all know, the Rolex parts bin was not an exact science back then, and the was not a clear line of delineation when certain dials went into certain cases.

All that said, the watch posted by the OP with a case number of 2,229,XXX would be the earliest one I know of (by some 120,000 cases) to have a Mark IV dial. It could be a special watch, because it is the earliest known example, or it could be something else.

[descartes]

Originally Posted by minimerc

I have a Mk2 2.46m with double punched.

There must have been lots of overlaps in the parts bin when they started to switch over to MK IV dials because there are definitely lots of MKIV's with earlier serial numbers. The one's listed above, fand also, for e.g. I think I read that Beaumont Miller's MKIV was a 2,41 case.

[Wilddyan]

Thoughts on taking a chance on this if the price is very good?

[Beaumont Miller II]

Originally Posted by descartes

I have actually spent a lot of time considering the question of "what are the earliest case numbers in which the Red Sub Mark IV dial began to appear?"

I have a Mark IV dial Red sub which is in a case numbered 2,36X,XXX. I purchased this watch from Matthew Bain, who assured me the dial is original to the case. To confirm this, I researched the archive in the Rolex Serial Number Project archive which is maintained in the Vintage Rolex Forum.

The earliest Mark IV dials appearing in that registry are as follows:

2,355,230 (papers evidencing originality)
2,42X,XXX
2,432,267,
2,437,564
2,451,731

At 2,36X,XXX, my Red Sub is, in fact, within the range of the earliest Mark IV dials listed in the VRF archive, albeit on the early side of the range. (Note that in Delgado's Double Red Sea Dweller site (see sticky that Beaumont references), he estimates that the Mark IV dials started appearing around 2,45X,XXX, although Delgado readily acknowledges in the write up that it is simply an estimate and should not be taken as a bright line. We know, in fact, that his estimate is a bit off because there are many examples in the VRF archive, and others, which show that the Mark IV dials starting appearing a little earlier-- and at least as early as 2,355,230).

The VRF archive also reveals another interesting fact: There is only a single meters first dial which appears after the earliest MIV dialed case, and that meters first dial is in case #2,413,XXX.

As we all know, the Rolex parts bin was not an exact science back then, and the was not a clear line of delineation when certain dials went into certain cases.

All that said, the watch posted by the OP with a case number of 2,229,XXX would be the earliest one I know of (by some 120,000 cases) to have a Mark IV dial. It could be a special watch, because it is the earliest known example, or it could be something else.

On the VRF dial archive there are not one but two meters first reds in the 2.41XXXX range. I know this because one of them is mine. The other belongs to another collector named Johan. Both of our watches have box and papers. His description on VRF states, Note: "Untouched, never polished, all original, never serviced or opened." - J. Looking at the watch, I tend to agree. When I had my watch serviced after I acquired it, I was told that it appeared to never have been serviced as well. Most collectors feel like the transition from meters first to feet first was in the early/mid 2.4XXXXX range. For some collectors the accepted cut off has become 2.5 mil, for better or for worse.

[descartes]

interesting, thanks.

[Frogman4me]

IMO the MKIV dial was placed into this case from a later time period. Perhaps the meters first dial was damaged and someone had this feet first dial and put it in. The case is too early for a feet first dial. I would pass instead of owning it and trying to convince people that its original.

[Wilddyan]

Thanks for the advise- will give it a miss and continue the hunt.