Reply With QuoteBut both companies' invoices state 13 watches, which is one per person of the Hunt team. So in theory all members had both watches.Originally Posted by M4tt
I don't think Rolex issued the watches to anyone. They gave a bunch to the expedition that didn't reach them until Kathmandu and both watches appear to have shared out in an arbitrary manner, leaving some with Smiths, some with Rolex and the senior members of the team with both. If you examine the Rolex given to Hillary by Boseks of Calcutta and compare it to Wylie or any of the other known Everest Rolex, it is quite clear that they are all marked with the same font to the same depth. It could be a coincidence, but it does offer a neat solution to the question of how watches that were not given to individuals ended up personally engraved. It is worth noting that the watches given to the Swiss expedition of the previous year were marked with the logo of the Swiss Foundation for Alpine Research with some being subsequently further engraved and some not.
But both companies' invoices state 13 watches, which is one per person of the Hunt team. So in theory all members had both watches.
In theory.
However, and for obvious reasons, I spent a ridiculous amount of time on this back when I was researching it. My conclusion then was that the team divided the watches up slightly less evenly. While I have little hard and fast proof, as anyone could have simply not worn a watch, there is a raft of circumstantial evidence of admittedly varying quality. For example, I am quite sure that Pugh had two watches: an Omega used as an experimental tool and a Smiths used for climbing. There is no evidence, either during or after (and his daughter did a good job of memorialising his life) that he had a Rolex. Given that he is now widely seen as the founder of sports science, if there were a Rolex connection, it would have been one Rolex would have been keen on. Both before and during the expedition he was not hugely popular even if his contribution was probably decisive given how unfit the team were.
There are several images and clips of Hunt with a Rolex and a Smiths, Likewise there are clear images of Wylie with both as well as others of the Shipton era core wearing both, or at least, due to image quality in some cases, two watches of the right size. Evans only wears a single watch, a Rolex, while both Lowe and Hillary, both New Zealanders, only ever wear one - and in both cases it appears to be a Smiths.
James Morris, the reporter for the times embedded with the team and explicitly part of it, as part of the sponsorship deal with the Times, appears to be wearing his own watch on the mountain: a military style 35mm (or so) Borgel. While Borgel made a range of cases for everyone from Patek to Doxa, the fact is that the brand that used Borgel cases and was available in India at bargain prices was West End, although both Favre Leuba and Longines were also in the picture in India. The Borgel watches were objectively better than the first generation Rolex and, if I'm honest, if I were climbing Everest, I'd want to be wearing a pre war 32 or 35 mm Taubert Borgel. Obviously a Patek 565 would be just the job, but an Alpina 4 is probably the better watch for reality. However, they were not cheap, even if they were explicitly designed for the job.
Norgay's arrival was a godsend to the team. There were serious tensions in the team on a range of issues and there was even more mishandled tension with the core of high altitude sherpas on which the entire mission was dependent. As an experienced and respected Sirdar, he complemented Wylie's authority and helped resolve the key issues rapidly. At the this point, he was explicitly contracted not to climb terribly high and only in a support role. However, the team were quite explicitly clear that he was needed for a variety of reasons - that his authority would get the best performance from other sherpas - and persuade them to climb in situations where they might choose discretion over valour, that he was familiar with the geography of the upper peak. There had been fine co-operation (and perhaps a little spying) between the Swiss team and the British, with the Swiss using the British observations from 1951 in route planning and the Swiss returning the favour. However, Norgay had unique experience and a proven track record. Getting him onside, and to commit to the endeavour was, quite literally critical to the venture.
As it happened, Norgay was carrying a recovering back injury. Hunt was unaware of the severity of the injury, which had had Norgay laid up in bed for months and completely blown his confidence. However, on the trek to meet the team, Norgay's back had recovered well and so he would have been increasingly ready to negotiate his role and build relations with the new team - which is what happened. Hunt, ever the pragmatist and with his authority still far from cemented, would have gone out of his way to court Norgay - as would Wylie, who knew him well and as a Gurkha officer was effectively the officer to Norgays' RSM. Given Norgay's attitude to watches as trophies, before and after, it's hard to imagine that getting his hands on one of the expedition watches wasn't on his agenda. The fact is that negotiations as to Norgay's exact role and duties carried on up to base camp and Norgay clearly got pretty well everything he wanted. Looking at the photos of his wrist on the approach above and comparing it to Hillary's, it seems clear to me that a Smiths was one of those things.
Last edited by M4tt; 3rd June 2023 at 13:18.
The quality of research on this thread is really something else.
This might be obliquely enlightening:
"So again, after Lambert convinced Tenzing to join the British, he now had to make sure Tenzing was wearing a Rolex. I asked her why her husband was so pertinent… She explained to me that Raymond was in full believe Rolex, as genevan based, deserved it to be worn on top of a succesful ascent!
In honor of his friendship Tenzing decided to please Lambert, and did not take the “schmutz” she continued!
At first I thought, what’s a “schmutz”, so I asked her…she said her husband always said it like this to her. As we where talking german, the coin dropped and from “schmut”(German for dirty;)I explained her it was Smith, lol! 🙂"
https://rolexpassionreport.com/919/t...-norgay-rolex/
Stripping out the obvious pro-Rolex slant (and almost pidgin English), such truth as there might be in that could be construed as: "Tenzing had a Smiths but, being a watch snob, didn't rate it." That lends credence to your argument that it was a Smiths. But this involves crediting the source with some degree of accuracy and integrity (do we really believe him at all? I'm not sure I do.)
Good point(s). Happy to concede. It does matter.
(Expect a resurrection of the as-yet unknown brand that Tenzing wore, too.)
I don't.
Even if I did, there would be a question of exactly where he got it from in the very limited window between Smiths watches being available to the public and climbing Everest.
Even if that wasn't a problem, the fact is that the person who actually convinced Norgay to join the expedition was Jill Henderson, secretary of The Himalayan Club. Perhaps more relevantly, far from Norgay setting off to summit, the historical reality is that he was not even prepared to climb initially; a historical fact evidenced in letters from Henderson to Hunt. For example:
He was recovering from a back injury, troubled by malaria (as he was throughout his life) and probably depressed. Over extended negotiations, Norgay agreed to act as Sirdar, but only if he was made a full member of the climbing team. This was still only about prestige, as his commitment to climbing beyond base camp was only much later - on the mountain - as his health and fitness returned.
It's interesting that the watch with the Bonklip-style* bracelet** doesn't reappear in many photos - the photos of Tenzing post-summit arriving in London Airport show him wearing one watch as he exits the plane, and then (strangely) two watches, both with leather straps (Hillary only wears a single watch). Presumably, these are the two Tenzing was given after the successful climb but why he adds a second watch is beyond me. As for his "special watch", it's not even mentioned in his autobiography (from memory). Indeed, his most treasured items appeared to be the red scarf he was given by Lambert, and his Swiss reindeer boots. One of the two post-summit watches is, most definitely, a Rolex, visible quite clearly in photos from London July '53.
I do wonder whether we read too much into what people wear, and why, but I'm sure that won't stop someone trying to make some money out of it somewhere...
* A similar watch does reappear in photos in 1955, on what looks to be a Rolex bracelet, which may or not be telling...
** He's not the only one to wear a watch on a bracelet - Pugh's (chronograph?) watch is on a very strange linked thing, that I don't recognise at all!
Pugh wore an Omega CK2451 which he had well before the expedition - there's photos of him wearing it at Farnborough in 1951. Personally, having done a bit of climbing in my past, and having spent a year in India, I think that the Bonklip is a very natural choice. It's all about sweat. The one thing that very hot climates and snow and ice climbing have in common is sweat. The perennial problem, not really solved until Goretex is that good waterproof clothing may well keep the wet and cold out, but it also keeps the sweat in - using natural fibres in multiple layers can get a decent wicking effect going, but generally not around the wrists as they tend to be fairly tightly bound in an attempt to get a seal and so they tend to become a bit soggy - and a leather strap becomes a serious liability. The bonclip was explicitly designed to avoid that as it both allows the skin to breath and doesn't hold moisture. That's why they were so popular in hot climates.
I'd imagine that, for Sherpas, watches would be a very desirable thing as they are both a valuable tool, but also a signifier of success. We know that Norgay was given a gold Datejust by Rolex in '52 after the Swiss expedition and I suspect that would be very close to his heart. For a host of reasons I'm really unsure that he'd have been given a watch by Bruce. Likewise, whatever the watch on his wrist on Evewrest was, it wasn't gold, so it wasn't the Lambert one.
I'm assuming that both the good Rev and yourself are less convinced by the photos than I am, and I quite agree that who was first to the top out of the first two to the top is beyond even my capacity for pedantry. As such, while it still looks like the one to me, I'd be really delighted to have my certainty shaken...
I think what I’m saying is that it’s complicated. There’s definitely an unknown (possibly Smiths) watch on a Bonklip-style bracelet. That watch *may* be the watch that Tenzing referred to as his “special watch”. It would fit, given he appears to be wearing it in those photos straight after their return. That watch, presumably, was special to him personally. Perhaps because he used it on a previous climb, or a particularly challenging climb? If so, it wasn’t one of the expedition Smiths. And it probably wasn’t the Lambert ‘52 Rolex. So I’m leaning towards something else. Does that make sense?
Oh. And then there’s that second Rolex that he’s wearing in later photos. I don’t think even RPR has identified that one before… it’s not a DJ. Looks similar to EH’s. There’s an advert that we’ve all seen - the “Climbers pay tribute to Rolex” with Hillary, Hunt and Tenzing’s photos and quotes. Tenzing, annoying, suggests that he had used a Rolex watch *before* the 1953 expedition. How long was he holed up with a bad back? Was there time between the end of the Lambert expedition and the Hunt expedition for him to wear a Rolex in the mountains?
The one thing we can be sure of is that it wasn't the Lambert Datejust - there's a multitude of colour pictures and whatever he's wearing just isn't gold.
Frankly, I'm not going to take That advert as remotely reliable for reasons I have explained in detail. None of it rings true and at least some of it is definitely not true. As such it's not a reliable source of anything but the mindset of a certain well known advertising agency.
But there was time between the Lambert expedition in which they nearly reached the summit and 1953. There was a second Lambert expedition late in the season, well after the Monsoon, but it did not go at all well and tends to be gently forgotten. However, Tenzing was a full member who was seen as a very safe pair of hands - and proved to be just that. However, the party was rushed, too late, too small, too cold and didn't go at all well. Is it believable that Rolex would have supplied further Rolex, especially to Tenzing and the rest of the pretty well scratch team - or that Lambert would have gone out of his way to equip him. Absolutely.
There's a nice sense of how poorly it went in this report:
https://publications.americanalpineclub.org/articles/12195339700/Mount-Everest-1952
But the watch on Everest wasn't a Rolex, because they really don't look like that from the side!
Last edited by M4tt; 5th June 2023 at 19:42.
FWIW I think the two 1950s watches most commonly associated with Bonklip (or B-type) bracelets are the Rolex Bubblebacks and the West End models.
Perezcope says it's an old / obscure / obsolete brand and that it has subseconds so (assuming he's right) my money is on a West End retailed Sowar Prima
https://www.vintagewatchstraps.com/westend.php
(NB the normally excellent David Boettcher repeats the common mistake of saying "CSI" = Civil Service India when in fact it's Canteen Services India, a sort of NAAFI / QMS)
Well, we'll see, Possibly.
As you know I identified the bonclip as being one that matched a West End one in my collection, so you can be sure that West End and Taubert/Borgel were front and centre in my thinking. The problem is that in 1953, the overwhelming majority of West End stuff would have been both too deep, too small or entirely the wrong shape. A perfect example would be this dreadfully redialled, but genuine watch here:
It's the Taubert case familiar to anyone who fancies a Patek and it's certainly would be in the running, except it's 29 mm. The same with this military UN, in another variant of the case used by both West End and Patek:
Except it's 31mm
Or this, using almost the same case as the CSI Longines and FL:
which is lovely, but still 32mm. The problem with the West End theory is that the later, larger West Ends were just that, later. There are a couple of other brands using larger Taubert cases, but they were expensive. Most of the Taubert/Borgel West Ends are immediately recognisable and, in 1953, small. I've got a few of them from back when they were a couple of quid a pop, so I can make the point in more detail later.
Why seek a watch worn on Everest, when you can wear Everest on your watch?
Actually, the source you posted yesterday actually contains precisely the historical source to confirm what I was saying yesterday:
This confirms, with rather convenient precision, that the only West End watches that can be in the frame were produced in a twenty year period between 1934 and 1954. However, to be clear, the 1934 West End Taubert case looked like this:
And it's even teeny tinier. Mind you, I can see how folks could confuse a West End and a Rolex:
Although the difference in quality between the pre'54 Borgel cases and the later ones is striking, and only goes down hill. That said, from some angles, this case shape, found in both earlier and later West End watches might fit:
The problem is. more than anything, the size
Last edited by M4tt; 6th June 2023 at 11:50.
Would Tenzing's small stature have any bearing on this? The effect might be to make a small watch look larger? I dunno, just thinking aloud.
Anyone remember the ill-fated Kobold with a stone face?
https://forums.timezone.com/index.ph...89#msg_7500775
One of the advantages of doing this for a decade or more is that most of the answers are close to hand:
I assume we can agree that that is a Rolex? The photo is from shortly after their return in 1953 and the watch is definitely between 34 and 36mm. He may only have been five foot six and a bit, but he had fairly chunky wrists.
Fair enough.
This hasn't aged well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4haRORdryMA
I like the evasion at 2:34 and the sudden edit when "Smith" [sic] get a mention.
You'd feel pretty silly now if you bought one of those crates . . . .
This one is from 1955 - might be the same watch, although might not be the same bracelet?
It may well be the same watch, but it categorically isn't the same bracelet. Perhaps more interestingly given the time gap, while it looks like the classic riveted Oyster bracelet of the period, it clearly isn't because (excuse the quick and dirty):This one is from 1955 - might be the same watch, although might not be the same bracelet?
The riveted Rolex bracelet, in common with all of the Oyster style ones, has a curved end , while the bracelet on Tenzing's watch clearly has a straight end, in common with aftermarket stuff from Fixoflex or J.B. Champion. IN '53 the bracelet also had straight ends but it also had the press in fitting found on bonclips and some clones:
Like so:
Last edited by M4tt; 6th June 2023 at 16:37.
I'm not sure that offering three watches as a gift to Hugh Ruttledge through the RGS in 1933 actually counts as sponsorship either. Ruttledge got one, Shipton got another and Smythe appears to have got the last one. As far as the RGS records go, that's it until the fifties. To be fair, Shipton carried on wearing his all the way through to 1951, which is impressive given that Rolex's state of the art 'experimental' mountain watch in 1933 was the decade old 'screw together' Oyster:
and not even the sport version, which was slightly less plate like:
Did Perezcope ever reveal what Tenzing's watch was?
I don't mind a tease but it's been a month or so and no word as far as I can tell.
I’ve been waiting for the same thing…
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
If he has found something new and interesting, then taking a while to get his ducks in order is fine by me. Tenzing clearly had a cache of interesting watches and the fact is that by the early fifties, there were a lot of watches that ‘drew inspiration’ from the Taubert/Borgel models. The Dennison Aquatite was certainly one, as were a small host of others and so the discovery of, say, a Doxa, Zenith or Fortis, that fits the images available as a a respectful homage of a Patek 565 is not impossible.
However, having spent far too much time squinting at tiny watches from the period and asking that very question, the fact is that everyone did their own variation on this theme and the one that fits best to my eye is the Aquatite. I’m always open to persuasion, but over the years I have bought most of the watches it might have been, at least partly to fiddle with but also because I can cope with a 29mm gents watch on a good day. That’s the main problem though, most of the candidates were the right shape, but tiny. And I suspect that that realisation might be the cause of the delay here…
Whatever ones thoughts on "which got to the top first etc" it's been very interesting to see some great watches and some fascinating pictures from the era.
F.T.F.A.
Indeed, in fact just to delight Rajen, here's the dial indices that Rolex homaged in the 6098 model used on Everest:
You can also see how so many of these period watches are variations on the Calatrava theme pioneered by Taubert/Borgel
Last edited by M4tt; 17th June 2023 at 11:55.
Perezcope said: "Tenzing’s watch was not a Rolex. I know now what brand it was, just waiting for confirmation from Norgay’s son." (Two weeks ago.)
So he knows what it wasn't but is still waiting for that final sign-off from his son. But which son?
According to Stahl "Jamling Tenzing in the forword of a Rolex book: ” it was a gold bubbleback given to him by his good friend Raymond Lambert.”"
(https://rolexpassionreport.com/919/t...-norgay-rolex/)
Now I'd like to see the source of that quote (beyond merely "a Rolex book") but if that's true (big if) then for Jamling to confirm Perezcope's non-Rolex brand would be for him contradict himself.
Or maybe the son in question is Norbu?
Well, that's no less problematic.
Play the video here: https://www.rolex.org/environment/pe...-norgay-legacy
And this:
“MY FATHER FIRST MET MR WILSDORF, FOUNDER OF ROLEX, IN 1953, AFTER HE CLIMBED EVEREST, AND EVER SINCE OUR FAMILY HAS HAD A VERY STRONG RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COMPANY.”
Norbu Tenzing, Tenzing Norgay Sherpa Foundation
From here: https://newsroom.rolex.com/world-of-...-everests-peak
Which links to this: https://newsroom-content.rolex.com/-...temedia-en.pdf
Which says:
"On 29 May 2023, the families of Norgay and Hillary will gather once again near the foot of Everest to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the two men’s momentous achievement. To commemorate the event, both family foundations, with support from the Rolex Perpetual Planet Initiative, have refurbished two cultural centres in the Everest region."
So maybe that's the cause of the delay. The families of Hillary and Norgay are not impartial. Things have been said that can't be unsaid -- and, crucially, money has changed hands:
"Following his historic ascent with Tenzing Norgay Sherpa in 1953, mountaineer and explorer Sir Edmund Hillary created the Himalayan Trust foundation. It is now directed by his son Peter, also an experienced mountaineer. The foundation has built two hospitals, 12 rural clinics, 28 schools and clean water systems to help the Sherpa people. It has been supported by Rolex since 2012.
The Tenzing Norgay Sherpa Foundation is also supported by Rolex. Created by Tenzing Norgay’s children, it is dedicated to the preservation of Sherpa culture and the promotion of education and healthcare in the mountainous region of Khumbu in Nepal and Darjeeling in Himalayan India. Tenzing Norbu, Norgay's son, wears his father’s Rolex watch, a vintage model from 1952."
(source: https://www.rolex.com/watches/explor...-to-the-summit )
Last edited by Rev-O; 17th June 2023 at 13:14.
This would also be the person who claimed that Queen Elizabeth herself, between ascension and coronation, personally persuaded Tenzing to join the expedition and ensure its success. Not the most reliable of sources.
Sure, discount Stahl -- but look at the sons and follow the money. I'd be very surprised if they say anything against Rolex. "Bite the hand" and all that.
I assume that the quote was from the sons and seems an unlikely thing for Stahl to make up - it's precisely the sort of detail that undermines his narrative. I agree that Rolex do wield significant soft power in this way, whether it is explicit or implicit is unclear - and hard to discover.
I suppose it’s possible that Zenith and Rolex used the same dial manufacturer (Singer?)Indeed, in fact just to delight Rajen, here's the dial indices that Rolex homaged in the 6098 model used on Everest:
You can also see how so many of these period watches are variations on the Calatrava theme pioneered by Taubert/Borgel
Remember at this point Rolex made literally nothing in-house. Unlike a certain other brand whose name escapes me at the moment. Cheltenham. Damn it’s on the tip of my tongue. Nope, I can’t remember. It’ll come to me.
Gold Cup watches? House of Cricklewood?
That may be true, but the Zenith is from the late 1930s and I haven't seem anything similar from Rolex that early.
Still no word on this, but I'm doing my bit to ensure credit is given where it's due:
A new piece in the Times today which mentions this story - not totally sure all the facts are correct!
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/m...xury-0pprhv9vn
It's what it doesn't say that is interesting. Just reads like Rolex PR, almost certainly a paid-for piece. Surely if money has changed hands then an interest should be declared? If it hasn't . . . well then Peter Howarth is working for Rolex for free and is a sucker.
Note also a link to Rolex.org at the foot of the article and then "Comments for this article have been turned off" -- why? It's hardly a piece likely to bring out the loonies and keyboard warriors. (I can't see anyone hitting caps locks and screaming "Jewish conspiracy" or "Rolex funded killer covid vaccines" or "Wilsdorf was a child abuser" with dozens of exclamation marks. I mean, you never know who's gonna say something crazy on the internet but I'd have though this was a fairly safe topic to leave open to comment; kill that facility if it's abused, sure, but to shut down the right to reply peremptorily on a topic as uncontroversial as this smells fishy.)
Last edited by Rev-O; 18th July 2023 at 16:26.
Griffith Pugh videos
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCyiMQ...WsOJLEQ/videos
My source:
Pugh X Rolex - A Scientific Collaboration
https://www.horolonomics.com/2022/08...aboration.html
In which the author, Brendan Cunningham, says:
"As I detail in my book, and as is detailed elsewhere [clickable link to Matt's Outdoor Journal article i.e. https://www.outdoorjournal.com/featu...versy-to-rest/ ], Rolex endeavored to get watches in the hands of the 1953 Everest mountaineers. It is hard to determine if the watches actually made it to the summit."
Er, it is not. Brendan Cunningham is a professor; has he not read the article to which he thoughtfully provided a link? So once again Smiths don't even get a mention. *sigh*
And: "Elite Swiss mountaineers failed to summit Everest just before the British succeeded, an outcome that could be explained by the fact that the Brits had Pugh and the Swiss did not."
Just before? Well, a whole 12 months earlier -- and Hunt's team learned some valuable lessons from the Genevans' failed attempt.
This is interesting: "To be fair, Pugh may have also tired of returning his Rolex for service (a sentiment many present day owners would probably share given service delays). After he returned from Shipton's 1952 British Expedition to Everest, he was asked to send the watch to Rolex in London so that they could, in turn, ship it to Geneva."
Leaving aside that what is described as "Shipton's 1952 British Expedition to Everest" was actually the British Cho Oyu expedition, this suggests that the Rolex Pugh wore on Everest in '53 was given to him for the '52 Cho Oyu expedition. But the Rolex invoice says that 13 watches were supplied to Hunt's 13 man team. We know that several other members of the '52 Cho Oyu expedition team (e..g Hillary, Evans and Bourdillon) were also included in the '53 Everest party. Did they all get a second watch from Rolex? If so, was it as well or in exchange for the first watch? The article suggests they not in fact get a new watch from Rolex which in turn suggests that the invoice is a sort of pro forma for publicity after the event ("Look, we supplied the successful climbers!")
What comes across -- again -- is how desperate Rolex were (and still are) to have that particular feather in their cap. They rushed to press with that infamous advert before checking the facts and they continue to this very day to imply that they made to the top. While I find their fanboys particularly stupid you can't really fault anyone for thinking that Hillary (and/or Tenzing) took an Oyster Perpetual to the summit in 1953. Rolex have spent a ton of money creating that impression with their very carefully-worded copy, well-placed photos, "charitable" work, and on-going relationship (again: read money) with the families of both men.
So: 1st place = Smiths; 2nd place = whatever watch Tenzing was wearing*. Also rans (didn't reach the summit): Rolex and Omega.
*Still no word from Perezcope on that. Don't hold your breath.
Is there a reference for that Zenith Pilot
John
Last edited by Dr.f; 12th August 2023 at 19:34.
I guess 3rd place would be Enicar during the 1956 Swiss expedition, being the 2nd succesful ascent.
What about West End Watch Co., from the photos it seems to suggest that Norgay wore one of those also.
Apparently that's not a WEWCo - or at least, that's what Perezcope is saying.
I would really like to know what it is, as it appears to be one of the two watches that Norgay prized most highly, rather than the slew of watches that he was given as gifts / rewards after various expeditions.
Indeed. Perezcope kept shooting down suggestions but still hasn't revealed what it was. Very odd. The last update on the Instagram thread was "There is no point in me disclosing the type of watch before having absolutely certainty that it is indeed the watch in question. Be patient pls. As the Germans say: Gut Ding will Weile haben."
I do wonder if we'll ever hear. Perezcope was waiting for confirmation from Norgay's son, but I think the sons' silence has been bought and paid for.
As to the the watch: a lot of WW2 ATPs made their way over to India after the war so personally my guess would be one of those.
Would be fascinating to attribute Tenzing's words to his watches. What was the "special" watch (see above) but more importantly, what watch did CG Bruce give him, and is it still around? That has some real provenance and (being pre-1939) might be something quite interesting...
I think Rolex has stuffed their mouths with gold. For the record, if they'd like me to stop posting on this subject I want a 1016. No need for box and papers but unpolished case and a recent service appreciated. :-)
Firstly, thanks Abraxas.
The chap at horolonomics really does some rock solid research. I'm pretty sure Pugh also used a Smiths when climbing, although I can't quite remember why I think this. The Omega is something I discussed in detail elsewhere a while back. The horolonomics article was the conformation I'd been after. I must read him more as both his writing and research are first rate.,
https://www.intlwatchleague.com/show...highlight=pugh
Last edited by M4tt; 19th August 2023 at 14:17.
Either that or a 6098 would do nicely.
That said, I'm not sure how accurate a witness the children are after the claims about Queen Elizabeth directly asking dad to climb...
I'd say that the ATP watches are also a little on the small side - The very largest are 33mm and the smallest are 29mm. A Patek 565 gives you the right shape of case in the right size...
Just for the fun of the idea of another Omega on Everest in '53, what about the Omega Suveran:
or Perhaps a 6b/159
Or perhaps the most obvious Omega to be hiding in plain sight, the Omega '53' - it's not like they are even subtle about it:
d
Or perhaps a Zenith Pilot (and yes, this predates the 6098 by quite a while and yet that dial does look familiar, to address an earlier question).
Last edited by M4tt; 19th August 2023 at 14:50.
I was listening to Brendan Cunningham in this recent podcast interview...
1. He says that Rolex (at the time) was heavily into research on how the cold affects timekeeping and how to deal with it.
2. Also Rolex admitting that they lied they were the first in something else (I think the auto rotor) and having to publicly apologize.
A LOOK INTO THE ROLEX MARKETING MACHINE, WITH AUTHOR BRENDAN CUNNINGHAM
https://www.scribd.com/podcast/64201...nd-them-and-th
I love Brendan Cunningham's website
https://www.horolonomics.com/
THIN is the new BLACK
Posting Permissions
