Opinions on this 5513

Hi guys

Hoping some of you Rolex lovers can give some critique on this 5513 I've been offered.

It's a very early 1966/67 meters first dial, serial in the 1.8M range.

Some of my thoughts/concerns:

1. Dial seems good - don't think there's anything to worry about here?
2. Case has very thick chamfers that come close to the lug holes. On a more modern Rolex this would point to over-zealous re-finishing of the case, but I believe the 60's cases had this fatter style of chamfer, and the lugs themselves seem quite thick.
3. The insert is where I'm a bit wary/confused. It seems very crude in terms of the font. Is this an early style of insert, or simply a poor non-Rolex replacement? I haven't been able to find a photo of a similar one online. Seems in very good condition if it's original. Obviously needs a replacement pearl.

Any opinions are most welcome!

Fake insert? Bezel looks the right shape.
This one is mine. It also has a 7206 rivet on it.



I'd prefer a twin lock crown on this vintage. You have a triple lock.

Thanks for the advice guys and cheers for pointing out the crown and the crystal - I guess both of these can be sorted if needs be.

Sounds like the jury's out on the insert. The font seems almost comically fat compared to any I can find to compare to. Will have to do some more research on that.

Will let you know if I go for it!

The fonts on the insert is thicker than normal for this watch is my uneducated opinion. I agree this not like any original for this year. Mine is also 1967.

Crown is easy to find, but they might not be waterproof. The xtal can be replaced with nice german xtal. Superdome is really hard to detect original or not. Original insert is very expensive.

tbh to me it looks fine.... but really with the saturation of rolexes in the world, you need a bona fide rolex expert to tell you. try rolexforums on the internet!

Frontal shots of the insert would be much better at telling if it's authentic or not. From what I can tell, it's a long 5 insert with a kissing 4 in the 40, which would make it very desirable and valuable if correct. Again, I would need better pictures to say for sure.

Crown can easily be sorted out (the one you want is a 700 which only has the crown and no dots below it), but the crystal will be more complicated. The correct and most attractive crystal would be a T19 superdome/dome, but there are so many fakes abound that it is highly difficult to tell if you have bought an authentic one unless you definitely have an authentic one to compare with side by side. I would say that a NOS, authentic T19 superdome crystal is almost impossible to find. If yours is an authentic service T19 crystal, assuming you buy it, you may wish to consider leaving it for water resistance reasons. But if you're more concerned with aesthetics than practicality, then you could look around for an aftermarket superdome crystal. Just be very, very sceptical if the seller claims its authentic and NOS.

All in all, I would say that this is a pretty attractive meters first 5513.

I agree it's the long 5 which is correct for this vintage. See my pic below. It's polished but hey it's 50 yrs old, which is not that bad. As for the dome, it would make a difference. Again see my pic below. If you don't want to spend gazillions of money looking for one, not even sure it's real. Find a competent watch maker shave of the side to give the appearance of a dome. Nice watch overall. [emoji106]





I blame it on the autoconnect.

The hands do look newer, as mentioned a front on image of the insert is required.
A triple lock crown is perfectly ok- I wouldn't fuss too much over it.
Dial is exceptional

all things considered looks in pretty decent nick, if the price is right go for it!

as others have said, dial is excellent and definitely the most important (cosmetic) factor

Beautiful example. I think it is honest as well. Get it while the getting is good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk