very good work and ...

Dec 08, 2014,10:10 AM
 

some first points to enphasize :
1) we know for sure that HEV is the result of a joint Rolex and Comex technical partnership that have survived up to the present days ( for ex. the Deep Sea was engineered and tested by Comex as you can see from below pictures ) ;
2) Comex has used and tested Rolex watches since the middle of the 60s before all 1665 , so the assumption that " Rolex has used other divers BEFORE Comex " should have to be changed : the agreement between Rolex and Comex has just created a status of exclusivity in the matter of testing and development.
3) the production of all PP mk1 has been certainly done in just one batch and at the same time due to case numbers in an extremely restricted range ; this doesn't change at all their condition of true prototypes ( by the way created with a special dial as often done by Rolex also with " special 1665 " and many times with watches delivered to Comex ) ;
4) about the supposed " problem " that 1 or few PP mk1 have been sold through Rolex AD.. this is completely irrelevant as a sparrow doesn't make a spring ( or how we say in Italy : " an exception is just a rule validation " ).
further comments PENDING.... LOL LOL LOL






















More posts: 16655514ComexSea DwellerSubmariner

  login to reply

Comments: view entire thread

 

Rolex 1665 Sea-Dweller: Mk1 Patent Pending "twins"

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 8th, 2014-01:41
The Rolex Sea-Dweller 1665 Mk1 Patent Pending has to be one of the most written-about watches in vintage Rolex territory. Some learned accounts of the origins of the MK1 Double Red can be found very readily on the internet. Of course, some of the earlier ...  

Extraordinary article, Joe.

 
 By: amanico : December 8th, 2014-03:15
One thing I don't totally understand, but you will help me to get that point. You show documents dated from 1971 and 1972 about those MK 1 PP, right? I know almost nothing about 1665s, but weren't the MK III or already in production and for sale, at that ... 

Nicolas.....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 8th, 2014-06:39
.....i suspect the answer to your question could be any number of possibilities. Firstly, my documentation shows that Rolex were lending a watch to a diver for testing in June 1971. The Sea-Dweller was, I believe, officially launched in 1971. The Mk1 lent... 

i like when you cuddle me with this topic Joe

 
 By: gensiulia : December 8th, 2014-04:26
;) thanks for this reminder all the best, chris

Now who are you kidding...you needed no reminder...

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 8th, 2014-08:29
.....you have the SD as part of your genetic code!

Thank you for a detailed and well-written history...

 
 By: jeffrey2 : December 8th, 2014-06:44
I find the history of the DRSD quite interesting, especially when compared to Rolex's history as a premier tool watch company. I have a MKIV dial but appreciate a look back at the history of the MKI and MKII dials. One thing I didn't realize is that the v... 

with the Sea-Dweller...

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 8th, 2014-09:49
.....over a relatively short life cycle, there evolved many different dial configurations....i guess that is also what makes the reference interesting and fun to collect....just in the 1665 alone in fact

Thank you for a fantastic post

 
 By: dr.kol : December 8th, 2014-06:55
and thank you for letting me to see these beauties in metal last Friday. It gets harder and harder to resist vintage Rolexes. But I'm trying hard... Best, Kari

Kari...really nice to put a face to the name....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 8th, 2014-07:43
.....and on the Sea-Dweller..... why resist? Life is too short!

Dear J.. Thanks a lot for this superb write-up.. The history & the story told are both..

 
 By: hs111 : December 8th, 2014-08:05
.. Very educative & fascinating as well. Congrats to your " Very Special SD's", just 1 nr apart & all the confirming docs ! In a way it's like reading in a history book, but at the same time, complementing the story of evolution. Thank you - Thank you ver... 

H...its obviously fun for me to write too....but yes....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 8th, 2014-08:07
.....its history!

very good work and ...

 
 By: marcello pisani : December 8th, 2014-10:10
some first points to enphasize : 1) we know for sure that HEV is the result of a joint Rolex and Comex technical partnership that have survived up to the present days ( for ex. the Deep Sea was engineered and tested by Comex as you can see from below pict...  

Marcello....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 8th, 2014-10:22
. ....first thanks for your assistance with my article. Yes, the issue of Comex is certainly clearer now. Differentiating between using Comex exclusively and alongside other dive companies and private divers now seems much clearer. OK...on the issue of "p... 

Where is the Rolex Comex 5513 HEV in the conversation.

 
 By: Bill : December 8th, 2014-19:39
Rolex submitted patent number CH-A-492 246 on 11/ 1967 (see document attached). That much we know. We also know that Rolex fitted the 5513 with HEV which is the earliest “Comex ” clean dial i.e. no Comex on the dial. The Rolex Submariner 5513 HEV appears ...  

Bill.....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 9th, 2014-01:13
The Mk1 Patent Pendings occur within a very narrow serial range...one batch starting 1.7 and another batch starting 2.2. I have owned Mk1s in each of the two batches. I will answer one part of your question and that is that I have had Rolex-to-Diver watch... 

seems there is a lot of confusion in this thread ...

 
 By: marcello pisani : December 9th, 2014-09:28
I try to answer your various questions : 1) first batch of 5513 Comex with delivery number ( this doesn't mean at all that they are the first 5513 with valve ) was produced at the end of 1971 and delivered at the beginning of 1972 ( btw for the moment I a... 

As you noted 1.7 mil case with Mk2 dial

 
 By: Bill : December 9th, 2014-09:51
Marcello as you mentioned it seems the 1.7 mil case must have been held back and later released for distribution with the MK2 dial touching DW. Here we assume, as I don't know if your conclusion, is all 1.7 were released later .e. after 2.1. Seems like a ...  

Bill....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 9th, 2014-10:37
regarding the Mk2 Patent pending with 2.2 serial....why do you think it did not have a patent pending case back? If that was the case, what would differentiate it from a Mk2 that was not a patent pending? My Mk2 Patent Pending has Patent Pending on case b... 

I did not say anything about your watch the pictures are self evident

 
 By: Bill : December 9th, 2014-18:20
I posted a picture of the 1.7 that had papers to support marcello's concept that the 1.7 came out later and the example I posted had punched papers MK2 dial and no PP. Your watch is not in question. Bill

OK...i minsunderstood....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 9th, 2014-23:58
....i thought you said that Mk2 patent Pendings in general did not have patent pending engraved on the case back..... my misunderstanding.

ok about 1665 with 1.7 cases ..

 
 By: marcello pisani : December 9th, 2014-11:05
you can find : a) PP backs ( I have a fax sent by me to the Lake in 1999 about a watch with case nr. 1.717.XXX and PP back ) b) standard backs . you can also have PP backs ( in my opinion all born with mk2 dial ) in the 2.24Y.YYY range. however is impossi... 

To confirm this....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 9th, 2014-11:09
....my Mk2 Patent Pending has serial 2,24xxxx...and with patent pending case back.

That is a fascinating comment....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 9th, 2014-10:31
"I will repeat up to the end of the world that in my opinion the only batch of 1665 PP born with the mk1 dial is the one at 2.1" Marcello Pisani And i now breathe a deep sigh of relief as i see my two PPs with their 2.1m serial numbers!! I have to say, I ... 

Great write up, Baron! :)

 
 By: blomman Mr Blue : December 9th, 2014-12:15
Thank you for a very interesting post! Best Blomman

i think i posted this before...

 
 By: gensiulia : December 10th, 2014-02:33
...this is the only MK1 sold by an AD i have seen with almost all the Papers. i'm agree with Marcello's theories, perhaps because he's the man explained everything to me? yes, maybe :) in your pay. chris ...  

Yep....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 10th, 2014-02:36
......this is my point too. Just one swallow a summer does not make. We have essentially 10 times as many examples coming direct from divers as direct from ADs (albeit there can be some crossover as Marcello highlighted). Mk1 is a prototype in my book.

This is a GREAT post !

 
 By: DrStrong : December 10th, 2014-03:59
passion, history, documentation....exactly what watch collecting is about ! Thanks so much !

Thanks Jeff....

 
 By: Baron - Mr Red : December 10th, 2014-05:48
I have posted these once or twice over the last 1-2 years, but never really elaborated on the two of them. I am not sure how long I have had them in my collection now, but possibly 3-4 years.....maybe more

I know...

 
 By: DrStrong : December 10th, 2014-06:28
...I was expecting this review for some time. It was definitely worth waiting !

GREAT WRITE UP!!!

 
 By: daytonaman799 : December 10th, 2014-18:20
This was a great write up! Fantastic piece of history and a great summary of it. Joe you just have a great handle on vintage Rolex and especially the tool watch end of the spectrum. Thanks for sharing both images of your collection and your knowledge of t... 

Beautiful article dear Joe, which I enjoyed so much reading...

 
 By: Subexplorer : December 11th, 2014-04:00
... while not a fan of the Sea Dweller myself, I always finish reading your posts about this model with the feeling that I should add one vintage example to my collection to round the Submariner theme. I only own one specimen from the last series produced...