Rolex Submariner 16613 Question HELP!!

[sturgeon123456]

Does anyone know if the rolex 16613 (v series non ceramic) has the movement with the blue hairspring (3136) instead of the the 3135É

[R1@160@alltimes]

I've never heard of the 3136 movement

[zak98]

there is a 3186 mvmt (in some GMTs) but have not heard of a 3136..

[Tools]

The latest 116613 have been advertised as being equipped with the Parachrom hairspring..

Since Rolex was putting the new movements in the last of the 16710's during the changeover to that models ceramic version, it is possible that they also put 3135's with Parachromes in the last runs of 16613's....... or even the latest 16610's..

Nobody who has one will open the back and look........

[padi56]

Does it really matter what hairspring is in tha cal 3135,now this movement has been in production since 1988/9 without any change. And has powered millions upon millions of watches,and in that time has proven to be one of the most accurate movements out there today.Soon all the complete Rolex line up will have the in-house hairspring,simply because they had to make there own. Will it show any real advantage to the average wearer over the Nivarox ones, in the real world IMHO I would doubt it.

[stephengreen]

Originally Posted by padi56

Does it really matter what hairspring is in tha cal 3135,now this movement has been in production since 1988/9 without any change. And has powered millions upon millions of watches,and in that time has proven to be one of the most accurate movements out there today.Soon all the complete Rolex line up will have the in-house hairspring,simply because they had to make there own. Will it show any real advantage to the average wearer over the Nivarox ones, in the real world IMHO I would doubt it.

Of course it matters. Evolutionary change at Rolex seems to be very slow and deliberate. Therefore the release of this spring means its a step forward in performance even if the catalyst was the need to produce their own. It stands to reason that a 3135 movement that has the spring is technically superior and therefore more desirable than one without.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=um5WX6WTDhE

[RLH]

I would think that any change to the design of a movement would constitute a change in nomenclature. Hence, adding a Parachrom haispring to a cal 3135 would result in renaming the movement to something else. Would this not be the case?

[Tools]

Originally Posted by RLH

I would think that any change to the design of a movement would constitute a change in nomenclature. Hence, adding a Parachrom haispring to a cal 3135 would result in renaming the movement to something else. Would this not be the case?

Yes, a change in design would give it a different nomenclature..

The Parachrom isn't a design change to the movement.......... it is simply a different spring manufacturer. It is wound, bent, fitted, and functions exactly the same as the previous spring..

[stephengreen]

Originally Posted by Tools

and functions exactly the same as the previous spring..

Not exactly, surely? It functions without any susceptibility to magnetism and has a ten-fold increase in shock resistance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3lEiFUmVM

[RLH]

Originally Posted by Tools

Yes, a change in design would give it a different nomenclature..

The Parachrom isn't a design change to the movement.......... it is simply a different spring manufacturer. It is wound, bent, fitted, and functions exactly the same as the previous spring..

If spring characteristics (i.e., dimensions, weight, etc) and performance are identical I agree. Otherwise I would classifiy as a design change.

[TheDude]

Did we ever figure this out? If they're putting them on the pre-Ceramic subs?

According to Rolex, the movement in the new subs -is- in fact labeled the 3135 with Parachrom.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by stephengreen

Not exactly, surely? It functions without any susceptibility to magnetism and has a ten-fold increase in shock resistance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3lEiFUmVM

Perhaps a slight advantage to the parachrome if you wear your watch with the back off and have a powerful magnet on the side.But in the real world of normal watch wearing IMHO the parachrome will make no difference whatsoever.And has not been proven to be more accurate shock resistant in the daily normal wearing, than the Nivourax ones. That were used by the majority of the Swiss watch world for the last 3 decades.Why did Rolex not invent there own hairspring before, simple escapement parts are very expensive to tool up and make.So when the Swatch group gave a cut of point 2010 to stop supplying parts outside the Swatch group.Many Swiss manufactures had to develop there own including Rolex but now Rolex can say now 100% in-house built I applaud that. But will there watches be better under laboratory test perhaps yes.But in the real world of wearing IMHO would doubt as they were very close to perfection before parachrome.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by stephengreen

Not exactly, surely? It functions without any susceptibility to magnetism and has a ten-fold increase in shock resistance.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3lEiFUmVM

Yes....it functions EXACTLY as the earlier Nivarox did....

It has improved characteristics over a STANDARD hairspring (although they do not define "standard"), still, the function has not changed..

[TheDude]

Originally Posted by padi56

Perhaps a slight advantage to the parachrome if you wear your watch with the back off and have a powerful magnet on the side.But in the real world of normal watch wearing IMHO the parachrome will make no difference whatsoever.And has not been proven to be more accurate shock resistant in the daily normal wearing, than the Nivourax ones. That were used by the majority of the Swiss watch world for the last 3 decades.Why did Rolex not invent there own hairspring before, simple escapement parts are very expensive to tool up and make.So when the Swatch group gave a cut of point 2010 to stop supplying parts outside the Swatch group.Many Swiss manufactures had to develop there own including Rolex but now Rolex can say now 100% in-house built I applaud that. But will there watches be better under laboratory test perhaps yes.But in the real world of wearing IMHO would doubt as they were very close to perfection before parachrome.

In theory, the parachrom should be more robust, and operate nominally under a wider range of operating conditions. If you subject watches with each kind of hairspring to gentle conditions (as you say "normal daily wear"), then there should be very little variance. I would imagine as conditions get worse you may see more variance.

[The GMT Master]

The only model with the cal. 3136 is the Datejust II - not 100% sure what the differences are between it and the 3135, I'm guessing it's related to the larger size, as well as Paraflex and Parachrom

[padi56]

Originally Posted by TheDude

In theory, the parachrom should be more robust, and operate nominally under a wider range of operating conditions. If you subject watches with each kind of hairspring to gentle conditions (as you say "normal daily wear"), then there should be very little variance. I would imagine as conditions get worse you may see more variance.

In theory yes in reality doubtful lets be honest here, most Rolex watches today get a very very pampered life reading the many posts on TRF.

[DadsWatch72]

I would like a new hairspring for my 1665. They spent a lot of time developing this metal for improved performance. Anything better is good.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by DadsWatch72

I would like a new hairspring for my 1665. They spent a lot of time developing this metal for improved performance. Anything better is good.

Well the Nivourax one in your 1665 could be 30 plus years old and its still ticking and keeping good time .Dont think you could get any better apart from the hype with the in-house hairspring.

[TempoKing]

Boy ...am I glad... I am not a "techy"...type of a guy...

[Big_S]

Originally Posted by sturgeon123456

Does anyone know if the rolex 16613 (v series non ceramic) has the movement with the blue hairspring (3136) instead of the the 3135É

The current Rolex web page, under its: Oyster Collection->Submariner->Steel and Yellow Gold->Innovations->Movement (link below), has a photo of its movement which is stamped "3135." This photo also shows the hairspring, and it's not blue in color, but, as I have read, since the first Parachrom hairsprings weren't blue in color either, your guess is as good as mine. Also to note is that Rolex may have changed to a 3186, or a Parachrom in the 3135, or made any number of other changes without notifying the general public... it seems to me that they tend to do so anyway.

(http://www.rolex.com/en/#/en/collect...ions/movement/)

[deserted]

Originally Posted by TempoKing

Boy ...am I glad... I am not a "techy"...type of a guy...

X2 as long as it dosen't stop and tells time , but i do appreciate the info

[JJ Irani]

Guys, guys.....let's straighten out a few things first.

To begin with, there is no such thing as a 3136 movement from Rolex. It's just a number coined by us for convenience sake........only because the newer Ceramic bezel Subs now have the Blue Parachrome spring instead of the old spring. Nothing else has changed......so technically we still have the 3135 movement but with the Blue Parachrome spring. 3136 does not exist!!

On the other hand, there is such a calibre called the 3186 which is a fair degree of improvement over the previous 3185 calibre. Not that there was anything wrong with the 3185, mind you. Very accurate, very reliable and very dependable indeed it was.

This newer 3186 calibre can be found mandatory in all the new GMT-IIC watches as well as some of the late GMT-II (16710) and Exp-II (my V-series is fitted with the 3186 calibre).

But, since we are getting technical, the 3186 is an even further improvement over the 3185, not only with the additional Blue Parachrome spring, but also the gearing and few other modifications which defines it as a newer and modified calibre.

However, for all technical purposes and day-to-day activities, nothing wrong with the older 3185 movement which has proven itself over the decades.

JJ

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Guys, guys.....let's straighten out a few things first.

To begin with, there is no such thing as a 3136 movement from Rolex. It's just a number coined by us for convenience sake........only because the newer Ceramic bezel Subs now have the Blue Parachrome spring instead of the old spring. Nothing else has changed......so technically we still have the 3135 movement but with the Blue Parachrome spring. 3136 does not exist!!

On the other hand, there is such a calibre called the 3186 which is a fair degree of improvement over the previous 3185 calibre. Not that there was anything wrong with the 3185, mind you. Very accurate, very reliable and very dependable indeed it was.

This newer 3186 calibre can be found mandatory in all the new GMT-IIC watches as well as some of the late GMT-II (16710) and Exp-II (my V-series is fitted with the 3186 calibre).

But, since we are getting technical, the 3186 is an even further improvement over the 3185, not only with the additional Blue Parachrome spring, but also the gearing and few other modifications which defines it as a newer and modified calibre.

However, for all technical purposes and day-to-day activities, nothing wrong with the older 3185 movement which has proven itself over the decades.

JJ

Actually JJ, if you look at the promotional material from Basel this year, the Datejust II's calibre is listed as the 3136, in the same way as the GMT IIc/Explorer II has the 3186, the Day Date II has the 3156 and the Milgauss has the 3131. HOWEVER, for some reason or other (my thoughts being that it has something to do with the larger dial sizes), the 3136 is not being used in good 'ol Subby. I'm still trying to find out what changes have been made to necessitate a name change, but there definitely has been a series of "new" calibres released at the past couple of Basels