Is this legitimate movement on 1970s OPd?

[franzspeck]

Hello

I have an oyster perpetual date with case serial number dating to early 70s.

Supposedly, as a non-GMT date, it has the 1575 variant of 1570 caliber. Which to my knowledge is has quick-set date and is hacking.

The watch is non-hacking.
The date has no detent for quicksetting.
The crown only has 1 detent position (after unwinding) where the time can be set, so date needs to be advanced by winding through X*24hr...

I don't have access to the inside of the case, but is this the proper mechanics for an OPd of this vintage?

[Dan S]

Non-quickset date is definitely correct for early 70s. Hacking/non-hacking was in flux in the early 70s, so more info would be needed, but I suspect it's fine. In general, if you are asking questions about the movement, I think it's best to post photos of it, if you're serious about getting accurate answers. You can get it open if it's important enough to you.

Curious where you got the information that the 1575 has a quick-set date. Can you post a link to that? I always thought that the quick-set date entered with the 3xxx calibers.

[Toronto Soup King]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Curious where you got the information that the 1575 has a quick-set date.

That it doesn't is the reason my GMT doesn't get much wrist time. It is by far my most troublesome watch to set, and typing this has made up my mind about that watch.

[franzspeck]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Non-quickset date is definitely correct for early 70s. Hacking/non-hacking was in flux in the early 70s, so more info would be needed, but I suspect it's fine. In general, if you are asking questions about the movement, I think it's best to post photos of it, if you're serious about getting accurate answers. You can get it open if it's important enough to you.

Curious where you got the information that the 1575 has a quick-set date. Can you post a link to that? I always thought that the quick-set date entered with the 3xxx calibers.

Hi Dan

I got from here that the caliber should be hacking.

millenarywatches dot com/rolex-caliber-1570-a-complete-guide/

quillandpad dot com/2018/06/15/exceptional-movements-in-history-rolex-caliber-1575-the-watchmakers-watch/

And then googling "set date oyster perpetual", every "guide" references the multiple crown positions.

Since neither of the 2 feature were consistent with my sample, I began to question what is the authoritative information and/or whether my sample is legitimate.

[Dan S]

OK, so you didn't specifically read that the 1575 is quick-set. I have never had a watch with a 15xx movement that was quick-set, and as far as I know, that feature started with the 3xxx calibers, as I mentioned above. Let me know if you find something different.

As I mentioned, many references switched from non-hacking to hacking in the early 70s. Without more information about exactly when your watch was made, it will be difficult for us to know whether it has a 1570 or 1575. But if it is non-hacking, then I would just assume it is a 1570. There are plenty of watches with the date feature that have 1570 movement IIRC.

[franzspeck]

Originally Posted by Dan S

OK, so you didn't specifically read that the 1575 is quick-set. I have never had a watch with a 15xx movement that was quick-set, and as far as I know, that feature started with the 3xxx calibers, as I mentioned above. Let me know if you find something different.

As I mentioned, many references switched from non-hacking to hacking in the early 70s. Without more information about exactly when your watch was made, it will be difficult for us to know whether it has a 1570 or 1575. But if it is non-hacking, then I would just assume it is a 1570. There are plenty of watches with the date feature that have 1570 movement IIRC.

The watch is a 2,5xx,xxx which dates it to the 1970-1972.

Bracelet clasp has a 2/71 stamped, which potentially confirms the date. (of course, it may not be original to the watch).

I feel better that non-quickset and non-hacking is not a definitive sign of something amiss. I bought it from a reputable individual seller, but didn't see the innards, or (obviously) have good understanding of the vintage references; i simply liked the way it looks :-)

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by franzspeck

The watch is a 2,5xx,xxx which dates it to the 1970-1972.

Bracelet clasp has a 2/71 stamped, which potentially confirms the date. (of course, it may not be original to the watch).

Great. Now people with similar watches in that same serial number range can let you know if their watches hack or not. But I really doubt there is any problem.

[Dan S]

Actually, I will lead off. I have a 2.41M DJ 1603 that does not hack, and obviously no quick-set date.

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by Dan S

Actually, I will lead off. I have a 2.41M DJ 1603 that does not hack, and obviously no quick-set date.

My DateJust 1600 2.8 mil (approx. 1971) hacks. 1570 movement. No quick set date.

For clarity, "hack" means that the second hand stops when you unscrew and pull out the crown to set the time.

[Dan S]

Another thread on this topic: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=473281

[samandglove1]

Originally Posted by franzspeck

The watch is a 2,5xx,xxx which dates it to the 1970-1972.

Bracelet clasp has a 2/71 stamped, which potentially confirms the date. (of course, it may not be original to the watch).

I have a 2,150,xxx that has a 7-72 bracelet. I wondered whether it was original too.