What have I got?

[London John]

Hi all, first post so please be gentle..

I've owned this watch for over 20 years. I was sold to my wife as a '65 Submariner, but I'm not sure it is "as advertised". I've take the strap off, and it's marked 5513 between the top lugs, and 979237 between the bottom lugs.

From my limited research, it would appear that the serial number makes no sense relative to the model and dial. The strap is marked 78360 and what looks to be 585.

I own quite a few old Rolex watches, and FWIW this one feels "right".

Can anybody shed any light on what I have here?

Thanks in anticipation,
John

[MonBK]

Serial # indicates 1963

[London John]

Thanks MonBK.

All the references I can find suggest the serial is correct for 1953/4.....which is what has me concerned.

[waspy1]

Originally Posted by London John

Thanks MonBK.

All the references I can find suggest the serial is correct for 1953/4.....which is what has me concerned.

There are quite a few sources of wrong serial numbers. Best source would be vintage Rolex forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The_Walrus]

You have a feet first dial so I would assume watch was produced 1970 and onwards unless of course the dial is not original to the watch.

[London John]

Thanks Walrus, that's what I figured. How do I go about ascertaining what's really going on here? I guess I find a local expert. Any suggestions for central London?

[Mike Wood]

I suspect you have missed a "1" at the start of the serial number, and that your watch is actually a 5513 from around 1966 with a later replacement dial and hands fitted.

A nice honest watch with potential...

[London John]

Originally Posted by Mike Wood

I suspect you have missed a "1" at the start of the serial number, and that your watch is actually a 5513 from around 1966 with a later replacement dial and hands fitted.

I've looked hard Mike, there's no "1" digit at the start. It's curious.

[waspy1]

Originally Posted by London John

I've looked hard Mike, there's no "1" digit at the start. It's curious.

In that case, it's from end of 1963 or 1964, one of the early square crown guard models after the transition from pointed crown guards. The dial would have been gilt, meters first so this has been changed at some point during a service. Not very unusual to be honest, very common to have had these changed at some point over the past 50 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jedly1]

for me i'd say there's a digit missing ...97@@@@ would make it pcg which it isn't.

easily settled by taking the back off.

[waspy1]

Originally Posted by jedly1

for me i'd say there's a digit missing ...97@@@@ would make it pcg which it isn't.



easily settled by taking the back off.

Thanks for clarifying Jed. I thought maybe an early square guard. I'll go along with your hypothesis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nycturbovr6]

Very nice!

[London John]

Thanks all.

I'm into vintage guitars, so am used to the potential for sillyness across decades.....or outright fakes for that matter.

Is there an easy way to take off the back, or is it a job for a capable repair person?

[Vincent65]

Easy job for a watch maker with the correct tools