167 replies to this topic

[Dell Deaton]

If there are no objections, I thought I'd start the year off right w/ a new Thread on James Bond watches. Over the holiday, I took some time out to create this image of the Omega model 2907.50.91 "Casino Royale" Limited Series "Seamaster Planet Ocean Big Size" wristwatch.



For a bit of irony, I "reflected" my 1:18-scale Sun Star Aston Martin DB5 model in the anti-reflective-coated watch crystal. (This was done as the photograph was made, as opposed to adding it later via Photoshop.) If you're interested in a hi-res image, I've posted a 3872 x 2592 (pc aspect ratio) version at 1138 KB, on my website.

Anyone else got some new 007 wristwatch photos? Thanks for looking!

[Dell Deaton]

... and here's the Seiko M354-5019 watch.



Rather than simply showing this James Bond wristwatch, I thought I'd honor it w/ it's proper context, a'la Moonraker, in orbit just outside the open Space Shuttle bay doors.

[Professor Dent]

Nice shot of the Planet Ocean with the Aston Martin reflection. Very artistic. The Seiko also looks good.

Here is my Omega Seamaster model 2531.80.00. I bought it in December 1999 - not too long after The World is not Enough was released.

[Double-0-7]

Your Seamaster is holding up quite well, Professor. Do you wear it often?

[Professor Dent]

It's my everyday watch unless I golf or do some other physical activity. I had it tuned-up & cleaned by a jeweler almost a year ago.

[Double-0-7]

It looks as good as new, and as I recall is already sized to fit me nicely!

How often do they recommend a tune-up?

[Professor Dent]

It looks as good as new, and as I recall is already sized to fit me nicely!

I seem to remember you trying it on. Didn't I have to ask for it back twice?

How often do they recommend a tune-up?

Tune-ups are recommended every 4 or 5 years as a general rule. If the watch is keeping perfect time, you can stretch it longer. I've had mine serviced twice since I've had it but the first time was more for a good cleaning than a tune-up.

[Double-0-7]

It looks as good as new, and as I recall is already sized to fit me nicely!

I seem to remember you trying it on. Didn't I have to ask for it back twice?

How often do they recommend a tune-up?

Tune-ups are recommended every 4 or 5 years as a general rule. If the watch is keeping perfect time, you can stretch it longer. I've had mine serviced twice since I've had it but the first time was more for a good cleaning than a tune-up.

Ask twice? I think it got a little more physical than that!

I'm happy-ish with my Seamaster-styled Invicta for now (6 years already), but what Bond-fanboy doesn't want the real thing?

[Dell Deaton]

Okay-- Having been away from this Thread for too long, I'm jumping back in w/ a combined image that features the two James Bond watches worn by Pierce Brosnan during his tenure as 007. The Omega 2541.80 (quartz) Seamaster and the Omega 2531.80 (mechanical) Seamaster.



The quartz model only appeared once, in the GoldenEye film. Like 006, Bond initially wore his Omega on what appears to be a black strap, but only in the pre-title sequence where they raided the chemical weapons facility. So I wanted this watch to appear on the runway he used to escape, as if frozen under ice. The watch that replaced it for the next three Brosnan films is juxtaposed on top of the "ice," in the snow!

[Dell Deaton]

This one I'm really excited about, since it's my first effort to photograph the Hamilton Pulsar P-2 w/ its LED display. And I wanted to do something different from the standard wrist-shot a'la Live and Let Die, where James Bond pushes the button to see the time.



So I pulled the module and put it on top of the watch case and crystal. In my opinion, the quartz engines that run their pieces can be every bit as exciting in their own ways as the automatics. And history-making, too: This model wristwatch first went into production in August 1972, and was the first watch in the world without any moving parts.

What better wrist on which to launch it than 007?

Edited by Dell Deaton, 16 March 2008 - 05:49 PM.

[Dell Deaton]

You're looking for a Rolex Submariner, reference 14060M.... Personally, I'd never recommend changing out crystals and/or removing the date window.

That's awsome...The Moore version, however, was heavily 'modified' by Syd Cain...so i'm not worried about that....

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Could you help me out? (I suspect this could head to a much larger discussion.)

... May I ask what the watch would retail for? Am I looking at US$5,500~ish? ...

You should be able to find a copy of the March 2008 (current) Rolex price list on this website <LINK>.

... Also, did Dalton's have the date magnifier? ...

It did.



There are several scenes in Licence to Kill where you can see the watch face and the date bubble. The publicity stills from that film are even clearer. Thanks to the Rolex design approach of incremental improvements, the most likely actual model reference options for the Dalton-Bond wristwatch shared the same case, crystal, dial, and hands as the 16610 shown here (and still available). Oh, w/ one difference: Dalton's Sub Date had lug holes, and the current 16610 does not.

Dell and others - great thread. Own a Submariner myself for a decade (dateless - I don't like the bubble myself) - does anyone have any suggestions for where to find a good selection of NATO straps? Found one website but it's colours where limited.

Same Here I've Been Searching For NATO Straps for Awhile Now!!

Have either of you tried West Coast Time? That's where I got the one shown in the pictures I've posted on my own website and on CBn. It's made to British MOD specifications, except in that the hardware is solid stainless steel (which seemed more appropriate to my mind, given the value of the watch it was carrying!).

Edited by Dell Deaton, 19 March 2008 - 10:35 PM.

[Dell Deaton]

Got a Tudor myself and I can't find a real difference between it and a Rolex except the price of course..
http://www.tudorwatch.com/

Everyone is aware about its history I suppose ?

Vaguely.

Tudor is owned by Rolex and positioned to penetrate a lower segment of the market. In the past, they've shared some components w/ Rolex, and even offered some very similar models. Today I think all of their movements are outsourced (from ETA, the same source as Omega, and owned by the Swatch Group) ~ though both purportedly modify these to some lesser or greater extent. So far as I know, no Tudor watch has ever carried the Rolex monikker, nor appeared as a James Bond watch. Rolex currently makes all of its own movements for its watches (so-called "manufacture" status).

[HildebrandRarity]

You're looking for a Rolex Submariner, reference 14060M.... Personally, I'd never recommend changing out crystals and/or removing the date window.

That's awsome...The Moore version, however, was heavily 'modified' by Syd Cain...so i'm not worried about that....

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Could you help me out? (I suspect this could head to a much larger discussion.)

Syd Cain, the art director (i.e. the (approximate) equivalent of Ken Adam) on Live And Let Die, had about four watches from Rolex modified. One modification was the hour markers turning from silver/white (I believe) to red when the bezel was rotated clockwise about 5 minutes - in order to 'magnitize' the watch on film...the other was to have the the edges of the bezel sharpened and motorized for fast rotation - in order to create the 'buzz saw' effect on screen.

[Dell Deaton]

You're looking for a Rolex Submariner....

...The Moore version, however, was heavily 'modified' by Syd Cain....

... this could head to a much larger discussion....

Syd Cain, the art director (i.e. the (approximate) equivalent of Ken Adam) on Live And Let Die, had about four watches from Rolex modified. One modification was the hour markers turning from silver/white (I believe) to red when the bezel was rotated clockwise about 5 minutes - in order to 'magnitize' the watch on film...the other was to have the the edges of the bezel sharpened and motorized for fast rotation - in order to create the 'buzz saw' effect on screen.

Valuable detail; thanks!

Are there further reading resources, links, and/or published documentation you're aware of for more information on this?

For example, I'm interested in books in their own right for their descriptions of James Bond watches. Christie's South Kensington: James Bond, Wednesday 14 February 2001 at 2.00 P.M., has a great two pages on the Rolex Oyster Perpetual Submariner, Ref: 5513, case No. 2683776 and the Syd Cain drawing for modifications. (Screen captures and frame-by-frame DVD analysis only gets us so far.)

So source materials on your references would be welcome additions.

[HildebrandRarity]

The following link...:

http://www.qualityty...submariner.html

...describes the LALD Rolex experience thus:


"With that being said, there is the matter of the 5513 (released in 1962), which Roger Moore donned in Live And Let Die. While it doesn

[Dell Deaton]

For Dell... "The James Bond Submariner, An Unauthorised History" :

http://www.qualityty...submariner.html

The following link...:

http://www.qualityty...submariner.html

...describes the LALD Rolex experience thus:

"With that being said, there is the matter of the 5513 (released in 1962), which Roger Moore donned in Live And Let Die....

Thanks for re-Posting and expanding on your Quality Time link, which I'd meant to acknowledge in the other Thread. John Brozek is a great guy, and I highly recommend him for folks who'd like to better educate themselves on how to avoid fake Rolex watches (follow this link for more details).

[HildebrandRarity]

Dell, I looked at a 14060M today with the msrp of $5420.00. The girl behind the counter said she would give it to me for $5000 flat (inclusive of sales taxes).

What do you think of that offer for the Rolex Submariner without the date?

[Dell Deaton]

...What do you think of that offer for the Rolex Submariner without the date?

Thought the MSRP was more like $5,300 after the price hike this month; but what's a hundred bucks or so among friends, eh?

Personally, I think the Rolex Submariner Date is a better deal right now. The Sub you're looking at has jumped by some $800 per year for the last couple, the most recent of which I believe is based on it now being certified. So you're buying at a high point, high market demand, given the change-over. The Sub Date 16610, on the other hand, is somewhat overdue for an update (hands and bezel more aligned w/ the Yacht-Master, is the curent speculation); and it hasn't jumped the same as the 14060M in recent years. When it does, it not only will, but it will also wipe out our last chance to own a James Bond (Dalton era) Rolex new. Assuming there isn't another "shortage."

Check your PM for more specifics.

[HildebrandRarity]

Thought the MSRP was more like $5,300 after the price hike this month; but what's a hundred bucks or so among friends, eh?

Personally, I think the Rolex Submariner Date is a better deal right now. The Sub Date 16610...is somewhat overdue for an update ... and it hasn't jumped the same as the 14060M in recent years.

What is the MSRP for the Sub Date 16610 given that your MSRP on the 14060M is $5,300?

[The reason i'm interested in the 14060M is because I don't like the date magnifier 'bubble'...and because it looks closest to the Connery and Moore (LALD) era Submariner (i.e. no date).]

[Dell Deaton]

Thought the MSRP was more like $5,300 after the price hike this month.... Personally, I think the Rolex Submariner Date is a better deal right now. The Sub Date 16610...is somewhat overdue for an update ... and it hasn't jumped the same as the 14060M in recent years.

What is the MSRP for the Sub Date 16610 given that your MSRP on the 14060M is $5,300? ... the 14060M ... looks closest to the Connery and Moore (LALD) era Submariner (i.e. no date)....

MSRP on the 16610 is around $5,800 now, I think.

Beyond that, I won't try to convince you one way or the other; they're both great watches in their own rights, and hold value well (today I could easily sell even the newest Rolex I own for what I paid for it). Certainly I've gone on record saying that, to the typical James Bond fan who hasn't spent years studying Rolex watches, I'd recommend the 14060M over any vintage Sub model because of how frequently and convincingly they're faked.


Rolex Submariner F-Series 14060M, above, prior to COSC updates (on current model).

Whatever you decide, I'll look forward to seeing your pictures here!

Edited by Dell Deaton, 28 March 2008 - 03:20 PM.

[Four Aces]

Here's mine with papers for the skeptic in us

[Dell Deaton]

Here's mine....

Great to finally see you (and your Submariner Date) here, my friend. I was beginning to wonder if you'd dropped off the horological earth!

Maybe we should expand this Thread to further ask:

1) Where has your James Bond watch been?

2) What adventures have you seen while wearing it?

[HildebrandRarity]

My James Watch has never seen even one night with me. It's two hours old removed from the authorized dealer.

I just ended up buying the Rolex Submariner 14060M.

Two things of note:

1) Rolex in Geneva have started to rotate the letter which heads off the six digit serial/production number randomly to 'beat' the fake manufactures. Each authorized dealer (of which there are five in my area) is given one at a time. Once sold, the country-specific head office sends a new one to the dealer. There is no 'inventory' at the retailer/authorized dealer [at least not in my city] so there is no chance of a jeweller/retailer/dealer carrying an 'old' or 'out-dated' production/serial number.

2) To my chagrin, they no longer have the very cool and unique light, translucent, tealish green colour on the back of each Rolex. It was discontued sometime in the middle of last year and the colour is the colour of the watch.

3) The latest serial or production number starts with the letter M - and the papers match the watch in terms of the serial number. How does one know that the serial numbers match? Well, they've made it easier to see. Just look on the inside edge of the watch (under the crystal) and you'll see the engraving on the stainless steel edge between the 6 o'clock marker and the rotating diving bezel. So, to reiterate, even though the this season's serial number starts with the letter M, the next one's could just as easily be C or J as it could be N.

Now to head off to Dell's:

www.jamesbondwatches.com/rolex-price-discount-survey.htm

[Dell Deaton]

My James Watch has never seen even one night with me. It's two hours old removed from the authorized dealer.

I just ended up buying the Rolex Submariner 14060M....

Good for you! Always best to stick w/ the James Bond lineage, I always say (to keep you from getting really tempted by the new DeepSea model now being promoted at Basel).

Welcome to the Club!

So-- when does the Omega come up on your list for next purchase? Waiting for a definite word on Quantum of Solace, or are you going to be an early adopter like Chuck?

[HildebrandRarity]

That DeepSea is an evolution of the Sea-Dweller 4000, then?

They're for divers who work for the Comex Company in staggering depths who undergo serious compression and decompression.

I'm going to pass on the Omega Seamaster. I can see the excitement of owning one especially if you're a newer (past 12, 13 years or so) James Bond fan. But i'm never one for being fashionable or 'current'.

Classic and timeless coupled with the ability to retain a high degree of economic value is more my style.

The Submariner is a chronometer which has been on Connery six times, Moore and Dalton twice and on Lazenby in OHMSS and, so, i'll stick to this brand for now.

In addition, I hear Rolex depreciates very little in comparison to Omega which is quite a financial benefit if you're ever required to liquidate a position.

[Byron]

That DeepSea is an evolution of the Sea-Dweller 4000, then?

They're for divers who work for the Comex Company in staggering depths who undergo serious compression and decompression.

I'm going to pass on the Omega Seamaster. I can see the excitement of owning one especially if you're a newer (past 12, 13 years or so) James Bond fan. But i'm never one for being fashionable or 'current'.

Classic and timeless coupled with the ability to retain a high degree of economic value is more my style.

The Submariner is a chronometer which has been on Connery six times, Moore and Dalton twice and on Lazenby in OHMSS and, so, i'll stick to this brand for now.

In addition, I hear Rolex depreciates very little in comparison to Omega which is quite a financial benefit if you're ever required to liquidate a position.

Congrats on your purchase. Don't forget to show us some pics.

I too have mixed feelings about the date bubble. Having a date function is practical however aesthetically..............not so sure.

[Four Aces]

My James Watch has never seen even one night with me. It's two hours old removed from the authorized dealer.

I just ended up buying the Rolex Submariner 14060M.

How did I miss this? Congrats!

[Dell Deaton]

You're messing with....

Hey, what do I know...I'm just a sucker who paid around five grand for a Rolex Submariner 14060M from an authorized dealer on April 3rd [just over a month ago] and the ing thing's losing time! I swear it's loosing a minute every 2 weeks and I just recalibrated it with a world clock on the internet to prove my reservations. So, i'm pissed and am glad i've got the papers, etc 'cause i'm going to be calling Rolex head office any week now! ...

Suspect this will end up being a longer discussion, so I moved it here, where it makes more sense (at least in my mind), than in the Omega Quantum of Solace Thread.

Okay now, a couple of things.

First, although the 14060M is not Contr

Edited by Dell Deaton, 11 May 2008 - 02:48 AM.

[HildebrandRarity]

[quote name='Dell Deaton' post='869235' date='11 May 2008 - 02:24'][quote name='HildebrandRarity' post='869218' date='10 May 2008 - 21:39'][quote name='Vodka Martino' post='869197' date='10 May 2008 - 23:56']You're messing with....[/quote]Hey, what do I know...I'm just a sucker who paid around five grand for a Rolex Submariner 14060M from an authorized dealer on April 3rd [just over a month ago] and the ing thing's losing time! I swear it's loosing a minute every 2 weeks and I just recalibrated it with a world clock on the internet to prove my reservations. So, i'm pissed and am glad i've got the papers, etc 'cause i'm going to be calling Rolex head office any week now! ... [/quote]

Okay now, a couple of things.

First, although the 14060M is not Contr

[Dell Deaton]

You're messing with....

Hey, what do I know....

Okay now, a couple of things.... That may not make you happy...

...it doesn't! Why would I be? I spent ~ $4,800 on a watch that I've had to move forward a minute twice since I bought it!

My cheaper TAG-Heuer 4000, which I paid ~ $1,450 in 1996 is prefect (repeat P E R F E C T) and its last service was over two-and-a-half years ago. The only times I move the hands on my TAG is once per six months when the clocks either Spring Forward or Fall Backwards an hour.

And the 14060M is now COSC as you have noted...mine has 4 lines of text above the six o'clock marker, for example.

How do I wear it? Not 24/7. I'd say from 6:45 on weekday mornings to about 8pm and less so on weekends. It sits face up when its off on my bedside table where the temperature is 'average', 'comfortable' room temperature.

I jog about 29 to 32 minutes every second to third day with it on and use the rotating diving bezel to see how long it's taken me to get to various points along my route. So it does take some pounding but so did my TAG.

I'm dissapointed because I need precision (especially for certain things to do with work) and don't like taking time off to visit a dealer to have things of perceived quality fixed.

Also including some feedback from VM here before answering further.

You're messing with my mind, Hildebrand.

Hey, what do I know...I'm just a sucker who paid around five grand for a Rolex Submariner 14060M from an authorized dealer on April 3rd [just over a month ago] and the ing thing's losing time! ...

I ask every Rolex-wearing customer who walks into my store;"Hey, how's your Rolex running?"
Half of them say it's the best watch they've ever had and the other half say it's never kept good time from day one. Hildebrand, get this watch of your over to Rolex and let them regulate it to its proper specs. They might argue that, being a 14060 model, it's not COSC rated and may therefore lose or gain more than a Chronometer rated model. Hang on. I just re-read your post. A minute every two weeks? That equates to approx, what, five or six seconds a day? I hate to say it HR, but that's within spec for a 14060. Still, Rolex should be willing to adjust it for you, even if they get the watch running fast rather than slow, because this would be preferable. Another option is to try placing the watch down in different positions every night to determine which position causes the least amount of fluctuation in time-keeping.

It's still a helluva watch, Hildebrand R.

Before going on, I want to let HildebrandRarety that I responded to your Rolex Sub concerns in another Thread where I felt it better fit....

Return the watch for a refund; this Rolex is not for you.

My hope is that you will take that advice in the spirit of friendship, taking into account the lengthy and numerous private messages we've exchanged on this watch a month or so ago. When watch guys use the word "precision" in connection w/ a "chronometer," the standard is average daily variation in rate of between -4 and +6 seconds per day, measured over 15 days in the five common wrist positions and exposed to three different temperatures. Your watch appears to be w/in those specifications and meeting the highest standards attainable for a piece w/ a mechanical movement. If it were outside of that, we'd be having a different discussion. In fact, I returned a calibre 1120 movement Omega Seamaster, exchanging it for another of the same model, because it was losing 5 seconds per day, consistently.

But when you use the word "precision" outside of chronometers, and, indeed, in referring to the work place, this watch can't do that. Even Omega, which is the official timekeeper of the Olympics, doesn't use mechanicals for that job. Think about a quartz watch, which typically varies between -0.5 seconds per day and +0.7 seconds per day. And digital models are better than analog.

Your TAG experience is irrelevant. My son got a Pirates of the Caribean watch free w/ a Mighty Kids Meal from McDonalds the other week, and that watch is more accurate than my Rolex Submariner 14060M. Add water resistance and shock capabilities, and maybe you're talking a $500 watch.

Now, if you want to get a bit into understanding how your watch might be manipulated short of having it re-regulating (which I'm not in favor of, as I'll explain below), here are some thoughts. First, if you watch the second-hand for one minute while listening to time-tones on your phone from something like the US Naval Observatory Master Clock, you may notice that your chronometer can vary by as much as half-a-second in disagreement w/ the Master Clock, depending on whether or not that hand is sweeping "down" (ie, from the 12 o'clock to 6 o'clock position), or "up" (ie, from the 6 o'clock to the 12 o'clock position). I have found this to be true on both my Omega and Rolex models. Another indication of the world in which you're living when you wear a chronometer.

Assuming your watch was fully wound when you started wearing it, your weekday pattern sounds okay to keep it powered. But I'm not sure what "less" on the weekends means; you may need to wind it on those days. Your watch seems to live in two different temperature environments, which can vary significantly between wrist and nightstand. Again, speaking to my own 14060M, it runs differently when I wear it on a bracelet (caseback in contact w/ my wrist) versus on a NATO strap (w/ one layer of the strap separating the caseback from my wrist). Like I said, "temperature" is a variable that COSC recognizes. You might then try wearing it for longer periods of time, including on the weekends.

Your jogging shouldn't make a difference.

In terms of off-wrist position, remember: COSC considers there to be five.

• Face up
• Face down
• Crown up (on its edge)
• Crown down (on its edge)
• 12 o'clock down (on its edge)

You consistently rest your watch in one. You'll probably see some difference if you experiment w/ other positions (and not necessarily just the opposite of what you're doing now).

VM is correct about having the watch re-regulated: It's a very simple thing to do. But I'd only have that done by Rolex, of which there are only three official locations here in the U.S. (the closed to you and me is New York; not sure about your neck of the woods). I'm really particular about dust getting into my mechanisms, and, of course, there is the issue of having your watch pressure tested after the work is done to ensure it's been re-sealed properly. To be frank, re-regulation would not be my first choice here.