Not sure if these are already out there, but thought I would post them.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4u...w?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YMS...w?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xkh...w?usp=drivesdk
Cheers, Bob
Not sure if these are already out there, but thought I would post them.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4u...w?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YMS...w?usp=drivesdk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xkh...w?usp=drivesdk
Cheers, Bob
‘The Rolex watch is found to be not sufficiently waterproof, bearing out reports from the field, and is recommended for deletion from the Navy’s approved list.’
They clearly preferred the Blancpain in most respects. Even the Rolex bezel and bracelet get a pasting. Is that what happened in service?
I don’t know where you find all these documents and adverts Bob but they are fascinating.
I wonder if this prompted Rolex to design fliplock clasp, to prevent the accidental opening described in the document and also changing bezel design.
Interesting but it fails to mention which Rolex Model was tested. The 5512 was not released until 1960? So I assume it was the 5508 (only rated to 100m), but it might have been an early 6538 rated to 200m.
One thing for certain is that I would never trust my old 54 Blancpain FF to 30 feet, let alone 300 feet.
It's at the very end that it was 6538Quote:
Originally Posted by Andyg
Think about when it was new Andy, cutting edge! And the Seapearl 600? This will make people look for these certainly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andyg
Well darn, it was good enough for OO7.…Quote:
Originally Posted by Exiztence
But not for real life! 😃Quote:
Originally Posted by ChromeJob
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfat33
Thanks mate, glad you like!
I could tell you where I find 'em, but I'd have to kill you and I can't be bothered with the paperwork...
😉
I think they already are Bob [emoji20]Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbee
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?m...2F323271529074
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?m...2F153049651908
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfat33
Nice, but the one on test had no bezel ring!
This man didQuote:
Originally Posted by Andyg
https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/vi...iving-in-depth
OP any connection with the article?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinnlover
A much later version than mine, however I believe the construction of the case and crown are very similar so fair play to him.
But personally I wouldn't with mine. Well I might if the original plexy and all the seals were replaced and I had a spare original dial and hand set (I have a spare movement :smug:).
BP must have tested them to 300 ft hence the name, but then I am sure Rolex would have tested their watches as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinnlover
Sorry not clicking the link. I never read Hoodwinkee since they started selling shite to hipsters.😈
Okay, I just had to check the Hodinkee link.
I can't believe that article was published yesterday, and today I was searching for military manuals on archive.org and came across an index reference to the Bulova test:
https://archive.org/stream/NavyExper...va+wrist+watch
In the index report was a mention of the National Technical Information Service, where-after much faffing around- I eventually uncovered the three pdf reports this afternoon.
Hodinkee have got a few things wrong (as usual) like the prices of the Rolex ($90 not 95) and the Enicar ($25 not 37.50) and the Blancpain was 50 cents less.
H also says only the Blancpain passed but the Enicar passed too, and was recommended for use.
Not the only things the article get wrong either, have fun spotting them.
I will take that as a no then!Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbee
:-)