Choosing a watch to take on a big vacation is always something of a dilemma for your average watch guy. A watch guy, by definition, has multiple watches. When a watch guy has multiple watches, it’s common that those watches fill different roles. There is usually something dressier and more fragile, a beater and maybe something vintage. A big trip poses a problem for a watch guy because he is forced to choose a limited number of watches from his harem that will be versatile enough to withstand everything from the hot tub to the dining room. Add to that the fact that no self respecting watch guy wants to take off his watch and leave it in the hands of another human, or god forbid put it in a safe, and the question of the vacation watch becomes a real quandary.
The problems are myriad when it comes to choosing one GADA watch. Vintage watches don’t do well in the water, ditto dress watches. Also, you don’t exactly want to be bouncing your Patek Philippe along the via ferrata (unless your name happens to be Bobby Español). The easy answer, of course, is to strap on a Seiko or a G-shock and not give it a second thought. Full disclosure: I did bring a Seiko SKX-009 with me on this trip. This workhorse beast got tagged into the ring to handle the hot springs in Rotorua (an area known for its volcanic activity, geysers and mineral baths), and the kayaking on Lake Taupo, which was created by the largest volcanic eruption in the last 70,000 years. I also strapped the Seiko on once to time a jog along Lake Te Anau in the far Southland. Te Anau is the jumping off point for trips to the Milford Sound. New Zealand is a wonderland of glacial activity and the stunning Milford sound might be most pronounced visual example of glacial valley making. Unfortunately, my beautiful wife had to miss out on the trip through the sound to take care of our seven month old, so let’s keep that part of it between us. I told her it was crap.
So, aside from those three instances, I wore the Explorer II Ref 1655 and I wasn’t squeamish about putting a 40-year-old watch through the ringer. It accompanied me on epic trips through Hobbiton, the now permanent set from The Lord of the Rings/Hobbit films, and through grueling tastings in the wineries of Central Otago. Along the way, it also accompanied me off the side of a cliff whilst paragliding outside Wanaka, off-roading (in a great resto-modded mid ’90s Land Cruiser) in Queenstown, and in a helicopter to the top of Aoraki Mt. Cook and the Fox Glacier. Ironically enough, I actually also got to take the watch on a little excursion spelunking. As I’m sure many of you already know the 1655 was originally designed by Rolex as a watch to be worn by cave explorers with the fixed 24hr bezel and 24hr hand acting as a day-night indicator during extended cave explorations. As a complication, it’s pretty much useless if you are not in a cave. By the way, I should really qualify that spelunking claim, it was more of a walk through a well-lit wheel chair accessible cave, and we were accompanied by a group of Australian pensioners. Nonetheless, I took my 1655 in a cave.
Let’s talk a little bit about the positives and negatives of wearing a vintage Rolex on a trip halfway around the world. As with most vintage watches that aren’t new old stock (rare), or those which have been polished, re-cut and then sold as NOS/unpolished (much more common), this 1655 has some wear to it. That worn/moderately scratched up state actually has quite a benefit when traveling the world, in that I’m not gun-shy about putting additional scratches on the watch. If it catches a ding on a door frame or a luggage cart, I’d never know the difference. Additionally, a well worn matte dialed Rolex attracts FAR less attention that its modern brethren. Sure, thieves are probably looking out for the hallmark Oyster bracelets, but swap out PCLs for a worn matte-finished Oyster bracelet and it’s a lot less conspicuous. What surprised me most was how well the watch kept time — not I’m not all puckered up about my watch keeping or loosing X number of seconds per day or COSC standards or anything like that. To me, if the watch tells the same time as my iPhone, we’re good. And boy howdy were we ever good. Over the course of 2 weeks I adjusted the watch twice outside of setting the different time zones. Consider that this is a 40-year-old watch, which for all I know has never been serviced. I was impressed with how well it kept time.
The watch was rugged as hell, flew under the radar, and kept good time. What more can you ask? Well, how a watch wears is a big piece of the puzzle when considering a single watch for a long trip. The SKX, for example, is a beast on my gracile wrists. I certainly would not want to strap that on everyday for two weeks straight, at least not on a NATO, which due to the quirks of sizing is always one hole too tight or too loose. No such issue with the Oyster. The case on this late ’70s 1655 falls somewhere between a 1675 and a 5513 as far as size and thickness, hitting something of a sweet spot for vintage Rolex (not that there is anything wrong with a 1675 or a 5513).
What about the negatives you ask? Well, the big one is clearly water resistance. As I’m sure you know, only the bravest/stupidest of souls dares submerge their vintage watches. This is due to the fact that most of these pieces are not pressure checked regularly and sport seals and gaskets that are likely more desiccated than Tutankhamen. So yea, like Gizmo, you can’t get ’em wet. If you’re spending a week in Cancun, this isn’t the watch for you (and you have bad taste in vacation spots). So, the easy fix is to pack a waterproof back up. Another consideration that might cross your mind when getting physical with a vintage Rolex is delicacy. Now, I don’t think you could really do too much damage to these watches considering the specifications to which they were originally created, but it’s not a bridge too far to imagine knocking the lume out of your handset which would be a royal PITA. Missing lume is a pet peeve of mine and can be costly to fix/replace. Lastly, I should mention that the funky ’70s era dial on the 1655 is not the easiest dial in the world to read, what with all the hashmarks and lume plots, but I did get used to it and it’s not really that big of an impediment.
The true test of any “X amount of time on the wrist” type articles is how eagerly you want to get said watch off your wrist, and I could go on wearing this Explorer II happily with out a break. Sure, there are a few draw backs to traveling the world with a vintage watch, but they are minor. The funky dial, the pop of orange, and the Rolex DNA combine to make this iteration of the 1655 a winner. But, you didn’t really need me to tell you that, did you?
by 
bart carr
Very nice article written by my RedBarSF acquaintance! I am preparing for a long European vacation this summer and plan to take 3-4 watches. The Seiko 007, as a very water resistant beater, is a sure thing but need to figure the others out. Dean’s article will certainly help!
TrevorXM
If you had to adjust your old chronometer grade watch every week — twice in two weeks you wrote — then it is seriously in need of service! It should be about once a month when you change the date. Give that poor old Rolex a service. It has earned it. And then you’ll have many years to come of adventures and it will actually be waterproof as advertised as you’ll get the gaskets changed.
canadry
Quality post!
My travel watch is more often than not the 1675, and for exactly the same reasons you mentioned. It never leaves the wrist, either; with a fresh crystal and seals, I have no hesitation wearing it in pools, saunas… I’ve even done snorkelling and recreational diving with it. That kind of use is what it’s designed for, after all.
I find that the modern Explorer II is equally well-suited to off-the-beaten-path travel, though the larger size might not be ideal for everyone. I like that Rolex has maintained the function-first nature of the Explorer series, and the super-legible (particulary in white dial) 116570 has it in spades — just like the 1655.
Another one that’s ideal for travel is the underappreciated Oysterquartz. Not only is it a practical and low-profile watch, but it’s also the toughest Rolex watch has ever manufactured. Unless one’s travel includes attempting deep-diving records, it’s more than enough for anything, and is another that can stay on the wrist at all times. (Really, any steel Rolex can; I just tend to prefer the look of the non-PCL models for going places and doing things.)
Less is more when travelling, and I find it’s best to have only one watch to keep track of. You’re right that choosing it is a bit of a dilemma, though. 😛
Greg
Lovely write up, really enjoyed that.
To be fair, I think you’d be more likely to be savaged by a rogue squadron of Kiwi birds than mugged for your watch in 99% of NZ, but a great read nonetheless.