Submariner 6536 Project and Info

[Kiwinz]

Hello to all Your Vintage Submariner Fans.

As I showed some pics of my 6536 yesterday, here is a bit more info and pics about the watch.

As You Experts well know, the 6536 Submariner is quite rare, so I gathered a bit of info about this Watch as they don't pop up very often.

When I first had the watch offered to me, I thought: "Bugger me, what is this bashed up piece of...watch" .

But after closer inspection of the case the old blood pressure started to rise.
Despite the fact that there were a few bits missing and the dial wasn't appealing at all at first, it turned out for the better.

Here are some pics as I got the watch.











As I inspected the case and opened up the watch, it just got better and better.

Turned out to be a TRUE "BREVET 6536" CASE with Serialno: 893xx

The Caseback was stamped 6538 [crossed out] and re stamped 6536

and the 1030 movement didn't look as bad either. OK, the tube and crown was missing, but that's easy to fix, my main concern was that the movement wasn't damaged as it was a bit loose in the Case and the hour hands, which were bunched up, were hitting the dial.




















So, of it went to my Watchmaker, and after dismantling the movement, it turned out better than I thought, a new Mainspring was fitted, clean and lube a few tweecks here and there, new tube and crown and away it went.

Verdict,== Movement good as new.

As for the Hands and Dial, well..that's another story, after close examination it turned out for sure the Hands been relumed before but had an awful green tint too it and the lume was fallen out of the hour hand.
Lucky for me I got an awesome watchmaker [ Rolex trained and 47 years under His belt], had all the goodies needed on Hand, so He matched as good as possible the color of the Hourmakers with the Relume of the Hands.
which, Thanks God, still the original GOLDEN HANDS, a bit fragile and we decided it wasn't worth the risk pulling them off to remove the Back of the dial.

The Dial: That was the bit disappointing part I guess, under the 60x loupe it turned out that the dial is for sure genuine Rolex, but has been retouched as You can clearly see the Hour markers have been re-lumed, but more disappointing was the fact that someone was out of it adding the Depth Rating.

Wrong way with the =300ft and a bit wonky too.










The Dial would have been replaced from a later model as it was machined down to suit the case, therefore the SWISS marking disappeared.

Here are by the way the Dial diameters as some info for some Vintage Subs:

6536 – 26,98mm circa cal. 1030 deep 100/330
6536/1 – 27,68mm circa cal 1030 deep 100/330
5508 – 27,69mm circa cal 1530 deep 100/330
6538 – 27,00mm circa cal 1030 deep 200/660
5510 – 26,96mm circa cal.1030 deep 200/660


As the Dials of the later 6536 did had a Four Liner Dial, it could be hot debated if this one was such a Rare Bird, or did they just took anyone to fit???
Being a bit stuffed up anyway, ..it really doesn't matter.

The Plexi was a challenge as well, searched around the globe, but finally found a NOS T18 Super dome in Switzerland.

We did fit a different dome in the beginning, but just isn't the same as the T18 is the only one especially made for the 6536.


The Bezel insert is another challenge I guess, but luckily it's only the insert missing which we used a Later Submariner one and machined it down to suit.
Is on the things to find list as well.


So all what was left was bending the clasp on the bracelet back into shape so it closes again,..don't ask me please what's from, but I love it with the 2/62 Vintage Clasp and President style bracelet and away it went.


So here are some more pics from the 6536 up and running, it keeps perfect time, and what I love the most as a surprise...it still glows nicely.










LUME SHOT





Now last not least some info of the 6536 and 6536/1 [ source Vintage hour and Stefano ] which might be of interest for some of You.

The Rolex Submariner models reference 6536 and 6536/1 are very closely associated by reference numbers but there are very notable differences which will be covered comprehensively in this article. By comparison, the Rolex Submariner ref. 6536 is indeed a very rare model reference, in which there are only approximately 100 pieces which were produced. According to orologiovintage.it, this elusively scarce no-crown guard 6536 was produced only for 1 year in 1955, and the documented serial numbers range from 8912x – 8947x. As for reference 6536/1, this model was produced between 1955-1959.

Is there really a difference in the movements of 6536 and 6536-1?

Siphoning through the Vintage Rolex Forum archives, there is a wealth of data on both model references. One very interesting question which was always raised is concerned with the legitimacy of a "chronometer" movement in either 6536 or 6536-1. According to a reply by RolexWatchTime on 8th July 2008 on VRF:

I am still waiting for someone to show in printed Rolex literature that the -1 is a chronometer and the 6536 is not. Waiting….these are truths that become such, based on repeated theoretical subjection…

It is not in any catalogue that way. In fact you will not see a 6536-1 in any catalogue from the period. It is never mentioned, but it is far more common.

The 6536 originally used a different gasket and a different crystal and a different case tool jig. I think it is a totally different watch and the movement is not part of the difference at all. The difference is in the case.

Just like a 5508…sometimes they are chronometer sometimes they are not. Why then is not the chronometer version of the 5508 a 5508-1

The 6542 was available as a 17 jewel non chronometer. I have a catalogue that states this….ever seen one? Why then is not the chronometer version that we all know designated as a 6542-1?

This difference is a theory. I wish someone would get to the bottom of it.

Until I see it in print I consider it mere long running subjection.

I am open to correction…but I have been waiting 10 years.

As stated above, there was never a published article by Rolex SA clearly elucidating that the main differences between a 6536 and 6536-1, less mention the chronometer movements in either reference models. Now let's move on to the comments made by Marcello Pisani in this same post:

The main differences are…

1) 6536 has a 6538 case , so higher than the "thin" case for 6536/1 (the same you have in 5508) btw ); sometimes this case is defined "interim" or "intermediate" case

2) the dials have different width ( although the movement is the same ), as the 6536/1 is larger,so you cannot put a 6536/1 dial in a 6536 case ; if you do so the word "swiss" almost disappears in the rehaut.

Much more than dial and case variations?

One very interesting post in a different thread on VRF , by Arthur who has a different perspective in that he believes that there are more dial and case variations between the 2 Submariner references in question. He explains:

More dial and case variation then we think. I played around years with my 6536 and 5508s dial sizes and found that it must be dial plate variation..The dial in my 6536…not with a "1" referance was the same size as my 5508 dials from my results. But I suspect that case and dial plate production variables are at work here.

Being a watchmaker and a few years back on Kamal's old site we had this same discussion encouraged me to some investigating as well.

Owning both a 6536 and a few 5508's it was easy to see if the dial plate sizes were close. I took both the movement screws completely off the 1030 and 1530 caliber with the dials and hands completely on each respective caliber and swapped each into the opposite case and hand held them into the case. Waht I found was the dials Swiss fonts and outer chapter ring where not buried in each oposite watch case, but they aligned in the right place..Now I also respect Francesco's results and also know that case lip where the dial meets might play a factor as well as different dial plates produced.

This brings to mind the early pointed guard 5512 equipped with the gold gilt Swiss 4 liner Swiss dials that have a distinct dial gap to case lip on some 5512 cases and not on others. The question here is, was that gap caused by dial plate size or case lip production…no decisive answer has been reached

My guess is that measuring on one or two dials or swapping 5508 and 6536 cases cannot tell the whole small crown story. Like on my 6536 dial for example, sizes can in fact have a generous degree of variation..as when I ran my physical test on case and dial/movement swapping..all the parts in question lined up.

In conclusion 6536 case and dial plate production I suspect have yielded different outcomes to our results.


Conclusion?

Earlier from 2007, Marcello Pisani, a very knowledgeable vintage Rolex collector and researcher posted the differences between 6536 and 6536-1 on VRF.

the 6536 ( early 1955-1956 ,first with 5 digits case number ) has the following features :

1) the case is a little shorter than 6538 but is higher than 6536/1 and 5508
2) the inside of the back in early watches ( 5 digits case number ) is punched "6538", overwritten "6536".
3) the inside of the case has the same width of 6538 ( at the beginning they in fact had the same
dial without maximum depth and also without the word "submariner" , later they were fitted with a different dial with maximum depth in red )
btw the dial for 6536 is larger than later dials for 6536/1 so you cannot put a dial for 6536 in a 6536/1 case.
the 2nd batch of 6536 has the inside of the back punched "6536" and the dial has the maximum
depth in red.
the movement is allways the 1030 for both series of 6536 and the 6536/1.

Just a few days ago on 14th March 2012 on VRF, Mark (aka MdV) posted his findings on the differences between 6536 and 6536-1:

Hi,

This is an old and returning question. The ref 6536 and 6536-1 are different watches but the difference has nothing to do with the movement being chronometer or non-chronometer. Somehow this adagium keeps popping up though.

Anyway, the ref 6536 is a completely different watch compared to the 6536/1. Actually, in contrast to common opinion, the movement is one the items that both share. I had both refs and the differences I found:

- different case: the 6536 case it thicker, same as 6538. Between the lugs it should read "6536" or "6536" after a striked through "6538". All have a small crown. Note: in my opinion there are even two versions of the case: one is a 6538 the other a "true" 6536, which has a thickness between the 6536-1 and the 6538…..

- differend plexi: should be tropic 18 (unique for the 6536)

- different dial diameter: a correct 6536 dial is 27mm in diameter whereas a correct 6536/1 dial is 27.5mm. Depth 100m as all other small crowns. "swiss" dial mostly had the "depth in red";

- inside of caseback: Most I have seen had a double ref so 6538 striked through and replaced by 6536 but I presume there have been casebacks with just 6536 stamped.

Now regarding the bezel: I checked the bezels on my watches and the only difference I could find was a difference in inner diameter. Obviously this is dependent of the glass retaining ring (not sure what the correct name is. I happen to have an example of both in a very good condition and there is little difference between the "looks" but I must admit I did not measure thickness. problem is that most bezels are not in a NOS condition anymore and maybe glass retaining rings might be exchangeable between small crowns as the 5508 and 6536-1 vs the 6538/6536. If that is the case, the bezels may be exchangeable too.. But if you ask me, I would say that "originally" the 6536-1 and 5508 bezels would have been the same, the bezel of the 6536 would have been different.

Based on the above findings, it can be concluded that distinctive variances between both Rolex Submariner references 6536 and 6536-1 are evident. From the "one model-one tropic" reference 18 for 6536 only, to the case sizes and dial diameter differences. It is indeed a very difficult task to pinpoint the distinctive differences without actually having both models in hand. As of this moment, I have yet to see a Rolex Submariner 6536 in person. (I thought I saw one in real life a short while ago, but found out that it was indeed a very good replica through the advice of Philipp Stahl — thanks Philipp!) Certainly, a Rolex Submariner reference 6536 has been on my mind for the longest time. No crown guard Submariners definitely have a special place in my heart, and I hope that this article have widened your horizons in the world of vintage Rolexes like it did for me. I would like to extend my gratitude to all the vintage Rolex collectors and authors whom I have credited for their literature and images. If not for their extensive research and willingness to share, all these critical information would not have been possible to shed enough light on the differences between the 6536 and 6536-1.


Hope You all enjoyed the Story, Pictures and Info.
Cheers
Mario

[cdweller]

Great in depth info, thanks for taking the time to post it!

[luvsub]

Wow, a great story behind it, very nice job done, thanks for sharing!

[Pete17]

Superb post Mario

I can only begin to appreciate how much trouble it will be to find original parts for that one.

I'd still like to donate a gift voucher to the optometrist for the guy who refinshed the dial....

Great info on the specs and history of the 6536 mate. Much appreciated.


Now, where's that "other one" you've been hiding?

[Kiwinz]

Originally Posted by Pete17

Superb post Mario

Great info on the specs and history of the 6536 mate. Much appreciated.


Now, where's that "other one" you've been hiding?

Thanks Mate.

The "other one"

....well give me a bit of time, can't release them all yet.

[mrarchiegoodwin]

Thank you for this excellent account of discovery and revelation. Inspiring reading the text and seeing the pictures. It looked hopeless but you and your watchmaker brought the watch back to life. It looks beautiful all over even though the lettering is a bit creative. I encountered the number 6536 but now I understand its significance. A genuine piece of history.

[Kingair]

Great post !

Thanks for sharing

HAGWe

[Kiwinz]

Originally Posted by mrarchiegoodwin

Thank you for this excellent account of discovery and revelation. Inspiring reading the text and seeing the pictures. It looked hopeless but you and your watchmaker brought the watch back to life. It looks beautiful all over even though the lettering is a bit creative. I encountered the number 6536 but now I understand its significance. A genuine piece of history.

Originally Posted by Kingair

Great post !

Thanks for sharing

HAGWe

Thanks Guys, it's a pleasure sharing some History/Info of this Watch.

[Vincent65]

Great post and story and info mate. Awesome photos too! Your watch-maker did a fine job fixing up the old girl. Enjoy it buddy and congrats.

[Kiwinz]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

Great post and story and info mate. Awesome photos too! Your watch-maker did a fine job fixing up the old girl. Enjoy it buddy and congrats.

Thanks Mate.

I'm always amazed what parts my watchmaker got in the cupboard,
especially when it comes to the old movements.

[katana]

What work Mario, first find the clock, buy it, now fix it with "God's help" it was good. Lucky you, to have such a good watchmaker! So well written, also told. You know a lot of people, with a little help also time, it gets you all you need, also it is beautiful. 100m-330ft, that you can not see every day.

Regards-Paradis

[Kiwinz]

Originally Posted by katana

What work Mario, first find the clock, buy it, now fix it with "God's help" it was good. Lucky you, to have such a good watchmaker! So well written, also told. You know a lot of people, with a little help also time, it gets you all you need, also it is beautiful. 100m-330ft, that you can not see every day.

Regards-Paradis

Thanks Mate,

it is certainly one I wouldn't wanna flip in a hurry.

[jnb]

Happened onto this forum while doing some research into this watch (see attached photo), which is one of several I recently inherited when my father passed away. It was my dad's regular daily watch for over 50 years, but I guess I didn't realize that it had become such a valuable collector's item. He did scuba diving in his spare time and bought it in the late 1950s because there were very options then for diving watches.

As I am new to all this, would be most grateful for any advice, guidance, information concerning this watch. And thanks for all the helpful info that has been posted here about the various early Submariners.

[watchcrank]

both have refinished dials. Difficult parts to find at any time. good luck with the projects. m

[linesiders]

JNB - from a collector's standpoint the dial makes it take a hit, from a son's standpoint - fantastic

Just east of you says hello

[R.W.T.]

James D. printed in his first edition that the 6536-1 was chronometer and the 6536 was non....this could either be where the misinformation started or he was just repeating what was believed at the time. I had a 6536-1 that came from the original owner and it was a 17 jewel unadjusted 1030.

The 6536 as your post very nicely illustrates is a completely different bird than the 6536-1. Truthfully I believe either came in chronometer or non chronometer rated.

[jimmyr]

Hi Mario, I have had no luck sending you a private message, but for your information I now own this watch and have fitted a refinished Rolex dial to the watch, please let me know if you'd like to see some pics and I can email, cheers, Jim

[MitchSteel]

Now, that's what I love seeing
Fantastic

[Mauiguy]

Great post with some great info. I'm going to save this link as a reference.

[Rebel]

Amazing!