1680 Red Submariner help please

[ahnets]

I'm close to purchasing this 1680 from my buddy. He’s a stellar chap and the 2nd owner but alas didn't know the 1st, so its service history is unknown.

It has a 2,55X,XXX serial. Using the excellent DRSD Red Sub reference , in close-up comparisons it looks like a genuine Mark IV dial.

Given their excellent condition, do you think the hands are later service replacements or could this just a really good example?

Also, the bezel insert doesn't look like the original, comparatively fatter font Mark IV inserts but then again I've never seen an original in person and am going by the DRSD article photos. Does the insert look like a later service replacement?

The cyclops can only be described as a little warped. Is that a trait of the original, or down to a replacement crystal?

Should any of the above be a deal breaker?

Thanks folks

[CrownMe]

Hands are not original. Do they glow in the dark? They were changed during service most likely. Insert also looks to be a replacement. Very nice looking example. The dial is in excellent condition. Case looks nice and thick and it has the original pip which is always nice. Nothing I see would be a deal breaker. Fine vintage watcy. Goodluck with the purchase

[JustinK]

Dial and case look really nice. Is the date wheel white or silver?
I think you are correct the bezel insert was replaced and I would guess the hands as well.

I would buy it if the price was right, not a deal breaker for me.

[JohnBaker3]

I think the cyclops has been "buffed out" and is no longer optically true.

You can try to "re-buff" it with an acrylic friendly paste, but it may likely require a new crystal to fix the problem.

The correct crystal, Rolex part number, is 25-127 for the 1680 Sub.

Welcome to the Red Sub Club....

[ahnets]

Thank you. Regarding your question about the date wheel:

When I look at my Ceramic Sub 116110LN or Explorer II 216570 I can categorically say the date wheels are white.

On the 1680, because of the warp on the cyclops it's not as easy to tell but gray/silver with a hint of light reflection. The date wheel looks very similar to my GMT 1675's.

The 26 on the 1680 is a closed 6 which according to this thread and from another thread this post, and this date chart means it's an original date wheel? Here's photo:



The 26 on my 1675 also has a closed 6.

Originally Posted by JustinK

Dial and case look really nice. Is the date wheel white or silver?

[ahnets]

I just turned off the lights and they do not glow in the dark (whereas my Ceramic Sub and Explorer II do!).

Originally Posted by CrownMe

Hands are not original. Do they glow in the dark?

[ahnets]

Thank you for the presumptive welcome (haha we all know I'm going to buy it in the end...).

The cyclops is bothersome, not because it's not original, but because it genuinely makes it difficult to glance at the date. Thank you for the pointer on the right part number, I will go searching.

Originally Posted by JohnBaker3

I think the cyclops has been "buffed out" and is no longer optically true.

You can try to "re-buff" it with an acrylic friendly paste, but it may likely require a new crystal to fix the problem.

The correct crystal, Rolex part number, is 25-127 for the 1680 Sub.

Welcome to the Red Sub Club....

[ahnets]

I forgot to mention the watch comes with a bracelet. It's a 9315 with 280 end links, which appear to be correct for a 2.5M serial.



However, the folding clasp is stamped "N10", "STEELINOX" and "9315" on 3 separate lines.



The only references I found on Google for "N10" is for a folding clasp from 1989....Source 1 is a watch store listing for a folding clasp and Source 2, a bracelet year table that says "N" is from 1989 EDIT: Source 3 says N is from 1984 and 10 is the month

Is it possible for the clasp to be stamped "9315" and "N10"? i.e. were 9315s still being produced in 1989?

JohnBaker3, I came across your very noble thread about starting a bracelet database as I was trying to research this on TRF. Great thread! Wondering if you have thoughts on above?

[Vincent65]

The MKIV dial is great and the case looks good, too. Plexi is not big deal at all - just get a new one. Hands, insert and date-wheel likely replaced in service.

[PoderEsBueno]

Looking good in general Like mentioned above probably hands/insert serviced before. Don't worry about the crystal, they will replace it, plus new gaskets when you take it to complete service anyways.

[ahnets]

Originally Posted by Vincent65

The MKIV dial is great and the case looks good, too. Plexi is not big deal at all - just get a new one. Hands, insert and date-wheel likely replaced in service.

Hmmm, trying to learn, what makes you think the date wheel is a replacement?

[BaliBryan]

That dial looks like it's never seen any moisture whatsoever, it looks flawless. Would it not be possible for these hands to be original? Or will age alone prevent them from remaining shiny and silver? Just curious.

[springer]

Originally Posted by ahnets

Hmmm, trying to learn, what makes you think the date wheel is a replacement?

The date wheel is original. Fat font and off-white like it should be. There is a lot of incorrect information floating around out there on date wheels. And even if it is a replacement, what difference would it make?

What I find interesting is the "N" stamping on the bracelet. i believe the 9315 was used on Tudors well into the 1980s - maybe later.

[JustinK]

Originally Posted by springer

The date wheel is original. Fat font and off-white like it should be. There is a lot of incorrect information floating around out there on date wheels. And even if it is a replacement, what difference would it make?

What I find interesting is the "N" stamping on the bracelet. i believe the 9315 was used on Tudors well into the 1980s - maybe later.

I have seen different opinions expressed on the date wheel topic. My understanding was the date wheel if original for this period would be silver. Can you share your opinions on what would be period correct for white vs silver? Is this different for Subs vs GMTs?

I agree it is not a deal breaker either way for the watch.

[springer]

Originally Posted by JustinK

I have seen different opinions expressed on the date wheel topic. My understanding was the date wheel if original for this period would be silver. Can you share your opinions on what would be period correct for white vs silver? Is this different for Subs vs GMTs?

I agree it is not a deal breaker either way for the watch.

The brushed silver started appearing mid to late 1970s through early 1980s. (I have also seen date wheels that are painted a light silver or gray color.)

A couple weeks ago a member here had a 1970 GMT for sale and called the date wheel silver. I had a private message conversation with the guy and asked him why he called it silver when it was clearly white in the photo. His response was that he thought the silver was correct for the era of his watch, even though under further examination he said it was white.

if you have photos of brushed silver date wheels from the late 1960s to early 1970s, please send me a pm and I'll respond with my email address to receive the photos.

Also, visit the dial archives at VRF and check out the 1680s. Most have the correct date wheels - not all - but most of them do.

[watchcrank]

If price is reasonable buy it. Looks like a very nice example. m

[Vincent65]

Originally Posted by ahnets

Hmmm, trying to learn, what makes you think the date wheel is a replacement?

It was not a definitive statement, and I'm not an expert, but I thought it was likely to have been replaced; same with the hands and insert, but who knows for certain, now? I thought the 6s would be open on a MKIV date wheel, as the 6s and 9s on my 1970 1680 are (it's not brushed silver, either) but there's reams of debate about it, as with most other components.

[Rolexpharm]

It looks like a lot of the things were replaced. Definitely the hands, the dial looks newer or very well maintained. The bezel looks new too. You might want to ask for the service history

[BaltimoreBrian]

To answer your original question, in my opinion, none of your concerns make this a "deal breaker." The price should reflect that the hands and insert may not be original.