5513 accuracy vs. new rolexes

[tschiemer]

I am contemplating buying a vintage watch, specifically a 5513 and wonder about accuracy on these old watches. Do those of you with vintage subs find they get close to cosc accuracy, or am I anticipating too much from a vintage timepiece?

All the modern Rolexes I have purchased have always kept good time and I have never owned an older watch but am considering venturing into the vintage world.


Thanks for any replies.

Robert

[Tools]

With the advent of the faster beat movements (28,8000vbh vs 19,800 vbs, vs18,000 vbs), Rolex has been able to boast a more stable platform..

From an engineering perspective, the newer movements should be able to hold a closer tolerance, over time, than earlier movements..

Having said that, the early Rolex movements are frequently quite capable of maintaining current COSC standards provided the part are not worn or broken... although I believe that "standards" of the day then were 5 seconds..

Keep in mind... COSC, and the standards we all use to "mark" our accuracy by were not in place until the early 70's.

[HL65]

All of my old Rolex keep just as accurate time as my newer watches including my 53 year old 6538 Sub. My 5512 from 61 is my first Rolex that came with COSC and again it keeps within the current specs. So for me- I am fortunate as I love the vintage look and they work like a charm too!!

PS- I understand also that the testing done in 60's was by independent:Bureaux officiels de contrôle de la marche des montres which came under COSC in 1973 to -4/+6 sec (from -1/+10 sec).

[adam78]

By the way, although a cal. 1520 (which was in the 5513 and Air-King) is not a chronometer movement, it can often be regulated to be within chronometer standards.

[CaveDiver]

I think what Tools is saying is not to confuse accuracy with precision. 60’s watches are capable of being very accurate but precision can vary more with the slower beat rates. Here is an example:

[tschiemer]

Thank you; this helps a lot. Robert

PS: Thanks for the PM information too!

These are my present watches:

[Clay]

I have never owned a modern rolex that kept time as well as any of the vintage pieces I've owned.....including the 5513's I've had......

[mike]

Originally Posted by tschiemer

Thank you; this helps a lot. Robert

PS: Thanks for the PM information too!

These are my present watches:

Wonderfull collection. A 5513 would fit very well. As mentioned the 1520 is capable of accuracy on par with any of them.

[Paracentesis]

My '71 1680 has been reliably +4 per day, for the past week, so probably within COSC.

[Pete '75/94]

Since my Rolex 5513 was serviced in November 2023 by a Rolex certified workshop it's not varied either side of 'exact' by more or less than 1 second.
AND - after doing some research on the internet, and learning that gravity can be used to correct the watch without having to touch the crown.
'Face up - to speed up' and 'on its side, seconds slide' and it really does work.
It's not 'instantaneous' howeverrrrrrrr - with vintage watches the less fiddling with them the better.
For example, Date Time Group or DTG
From 062200ZJan24 to 071500ZJan24 (watch worn on my wrist overnight) my Rolex 5513 showed itself to be low by .5 of a second in 17 hours. I lay the watch, face up, on my study windowsill (away from any electrical fields) and at 071700ZJan24 the 5513 shows itself to be exactly in line with zero (12 o'clock marker' on the BBC Radio 4 pips (pip six to be exact).
My Rolex 5513 was bought second hand (I'm not so snobbish to call it 'pre-owned') in 1986 for £850 and it never really kept accurate time, until this last servicing that is.
When I picked my watch up from the jewellers' shop in Hereford I thought at first that I'd been given the wrong watch such was the fantastic visual appearance, and again when it kept nearly perfect time.
COSC are said to be happy if their watches keep time to within plus or minus 4 seconds in 24 hours. What then is my 5513 if its consistently accurate to plus or minus .5 of 1 second?
My Rolex 5513 is a beauty and well worth the £1,554 spent on the servicing, replacement of the glass, new bezel, and some other bits and bobs.
My Rolex 5513 has been to just about every ocean and sea on the planet and has been to places not on any Google maps during my military service. It was on my wrist when I played a game of cricket at the North Pole (yeah, I did get a skin flash burn, I was told not to wear it against my skin, but what do Arctic Ice Pilots know eh?).
I have to keep reminding myself that this 5513 is a vintage mechanical watch - and it really should not be as accurate as it is.
I note the selling prices of these Rolex 5513 vintage watches with interest and whistle at the many thousands of pounds they sell for - however, my Rolex 5513 will stay firmly on my wrist!

[one80]

Having just had my 5513 serviced, it is now keeping within 2 secs/day, and about the same as my later 16600.

[Dan S]

The zombie thread lives.

[tschiemer]

Amazing: I forgot about this 2011 thread I started.

I finally got one in December 2023 - so I took years before it worked out!

Amazingly today Phillip Ridley emailed with the good news it is shipping after its service this week.

[RFC]

Originally Posted by Tools

With the advent of the faster beat movements (28,8000vbh vs 19,800 vbs, vs18,000 vbs), Rolex has been able to boast a more stable platform..

From an engineering perspective, the newer movements should be able to hold a closer tolerance, over time, than earlier movements..

Having said that, the early Rolex movements are frequently quite capable of maintaining current COSC standards provided the part are not worn or broken... although I believe that "standards" of the day then were 5 seconds..

Keep in mind... COSC, and the standards we all use to "mark" our accuracy by were not in place until the early 70's.

For instance my 5513 and 14060M both serviced by Phillip Ridley run at +4-5 and +2 s/day respectively when worn on the wrist 24 hrs. The 3130 movement is more precise and accurate than the 1520.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by RFC

For instance my 5513 and 14060M both serviced by Phillip Ridley run at +4-5 and +2 s/day respectively when worn on the wrist 24 hrs. The 3130 movement is more precise and accurate than the 1520.

[PaulMiami]

My 1965 5513 serviced in 1976 by Mayors, the primary AD in Miami, was very inaccurate, until I had Rik Dietel service it in 2017. Now it’s spot on. The quality of the service makes all the difference.

[Pete '75/94]

Robert, it's 25th Jan 2024 and I've just seen your text message. My vintage (circa 1976) Rolex 5513 continues to stay well within the 1 second either way of exact over a 24 hour period.
I've noticed that treating the watch to vibrations whilst working with files on wood (very minor vibrations - nothing like banging in nine inch nails etc) do cause the watch to lose time quite quickly OR speed it up, there's no way to predict either way) and what I am really chuffed about is the little trick of using gravity to regulate the watch.
'Face up to speed up' the watch is laid flat, and 'on its side, seconds slide' the watch is in the crown up position.
In the past I was forever unscrewing the crown to adjust the watch to zero, or exact time, by a caesium atomic clock (my job then was very much ACCURATE time driven). I had digital readouts wherever I looked, I just wanted my watch to reflect exact time too.
Sadly it drifted low and high, I lived with it.
AND then, last year I had it serviced properly, and that cost me £1,552. A bit eye watering, however my vintage Rolex 5513 circa 1976 is behaving like a COSC chronometer - and the fact that I can use gravity to regulate it has me chuckling, I don't like touching the crown at all.
Good luck in your search for the perfect watch, I found mine - I actually think it found me!
Bought for £850 second hand, no papers, from an authentic Rolex dealership in London in 1986.
We've been to places this watch and I, one of these days I'll write a book about it.
My Rolex 5513 Submariner. 'Its Finest Hours'. Should be a good read!