Rolex is viewed as a synonym for success. It is a hint of its owner's class and wealth. I grew up thinking a wealthy and successful man should have a Rolex Datejust Duo-tones on his wrist. I promised myself at a young age that someday I would wear a half gold rolex. "Yo man, are you calling me, a loser, because I am not wearing a Rolex?" shouted William Jefferson Clinton, the 42nd President of The United States of America. Hahahaahaaaaaaaaaa he wore a Timex Ironman Triathlon during his first term in the Oval office... Ooopssss sorry Boss.....
I always feel the pressure when writing about Rolex. Rolex is such a famous brand and with so much information around, basically everyone is a Rolex expert. I also don't know how to begin to describe about this Oyster Datejust 16013. The word Oyster marked an important milestone in Rolex's history. Created in 1926, it is a hermetic case which is water and dust-proof. The Oyster case has a screw in crown and a screw in back case; that is basically worked like a submarine. The case creates an environment that protect the movement from shocks, pressire, dust, water and any other intrusive element.
The Datejust was introduced in 1945, it was the first wristwatch with a date function. In the earliest models of the Datejust, the date would begin to change some hours before its midnight rendezvous. In 1955, the date-change mechanism became instantaneous and the date aperture was enhanced with a 2.5X magnifying Cyclops lens for easy reading.
Below are two vintage advertisemenst on Rolex Oyster Datejust during the 1980's:
16013 succeed the ever popular 1603 (model without the quickset date) and preceded 16233 (model with sapphire crystal). 16013 comes in 36mm stainless steel case, beautified by 18k yellow solid gold fluted bezel. It has domed acrylic crystal. Rolex 16013 can come equipped with either the jubilee or oyster 18k solid yellow gold and stainless steel bracelet.
All Rolex Oyster Datejust dial stated "Superlative Chronometer Officially Certified". This indicated the movement of the watch has survived the 15 days and nights vigorous testing by C.O.S.C. (Contrôle Officiel Suisse des Chronomètres). C.O.S.C. is the Official Swiss Chronometer Testing Institute, which is the institute responsible for certifying the accuracy and precision of wristwatches in Switzerland. In plain English, your Rolex is more accurate and reliable than average non-chronometer grade watches. Here is a Chronometer certificate for an Omega watch.
Rolex never gives out the COSC certificate but it issued its own certificate with the chronometer number on it.
16013 used the 3035 movement. 3035 calibre is the 27 jewels automatic adjusted to 5 positions and temperatures. It is a high beats movement with a frequency of 28,800 BPH. 3035 movement reigned from 1977 till 1988. It was replaced with the 31 jewels 3135 with the launch of 16233.
The beauty of 3035 movement. Clean, simple and well planned movement.
I have 2 units of 16013. I bought them 5 years apart from two different watch dealers. Actually the conditions of both watches are quite identical. Both are with jubilee bracelet with mint condition case and dial. The only different between the two is their dial. The first one is with the cloth texture dial, whereas the second one with the champagne dial. Both the dial is with the gold stick markers.
16013 is a true classic. Its design never fail in popularity and it is always very comfortable to wear. After almost 30 years, it is still running strong. Its 3035 movement never fail and still keep reliable time with a daily different of less than 5 seconds. Dare I say with good tender care, even after another 30 years these two watches would still perform their duties faithfully.
Is there any 16013 running on caliber 1570?
ReplyDelete16013 marked the quickset date feature..... so there shouldn't be any 16013 with the Cal. 1570. 1570 is associated with 1601.
DeleteThank you for sharing such a beautiful blog with a beginner like me. Your blog will surely made a mark in the industry.Check out watch store Pembroke Pines
ReplyDelete