1971 Seiko 6139

[watchmanjimg]

Not VN era and hardly in the same league but this was my watch from jr high. Pins wore through the band and it doesn't currently run but I always loved it. Kinda scratched up a bit but I sure would like to use it as a daily wearer again! Unlike my modern Citizen, it never failed me!

Dave

Dave, you should really see about getting that one running again. Here's my 6309-7049 diver, production date April 1984 but purchased new in December 1985 when I was a senior in high school. It saw a lot of hard use during my three years in the Army before finally crapping out in the early '90s, then it sat in a drawer until I decided to send it to Seiko for an overhaul in 2000. After that I foolishly sold it to a NYC bus driver, but in 2005 I contacted him and bought it back. Since then I've had it serviced and replaced the factory mineral crystal with a sapphire version. I've been wearing it a lot lately now that I've sold my Submariner.

 

[dmar836]

Mine's a "Pre-Arnie H556. I saw a review a guy wrote and he had a NATO band on it. Didn't look half bad. The bands on these were notably weak.
Thanks,
Dave

 

[Clyde from Carolina]

Hi Jim, thanks for looking. Here's the caseback.

 

[watchmanjimg]

Hi Jim, thanks for looking. Here's the caseback.

Looks like June 1968.

 

[Happy Hooligan]

awesome watches guys! I think the late 60's early 70's are my favorite Seiko styles!

 

[Clyde from Carolina]

Thanks, Jim. That sounds about right - he was there in '68-69.

 

[Happy Hooligan]

Thanks, Jim. That sounds about right - he was there in '68-69.

the first number is the year, and the second is the month... unfortunately it's only the last part of the year and if your watch was made for more than 10 years it could be 1978 also, but you know it wasn't so you're good.

Just pointing out how Seiko does it.

 

[watchmanjimg]

Thanks, Jim. That sounds about right - he was there in '68-69.

the first number is the year, and the second is the month... unfortunately it's only the last part of the year and if your watch was made for more than 10 years it could be 1978 also, but you know it wasn't so you're good.

Just pointing out how Seiko does it.

You're right, of course, but here there are other clues to distinguish Clyde's watch from one produced in 1978; most notably, the "Water proof" script on the dial and case back. This changed to "Water Resist" or "Water Resistant" in 1970 or shortly thereafter, for legal reasons I imagine. For instance, I own two examples of Ref. 7005. The watch made in 1969 is marked "Water Proof," while the 1970 model is marked "Water Resist."

 

[Happy Hooligan]

Thanks, Jim. That sounds about right - he was there in '68-69.

the first number is the year, and the second is the month... unfortunately it's only the last part of the year and if your watch was made for more than 10 years it could be 1978 also, but you know it wasn't so you're good.

Just pointing out how Seiko does it.

You're right, of course, but here there are other clues to distinguish Clyde's watch from one produced in 1978; most notably, the "Water proof" script on the dial and case back. This changed to "Water Resist" or "Water Resistant" in 1970 or shortly thereafter, for legal reasons I imagine. For instance, I own two examples of Ref. 7005. The watch made in 1969 is marked "Water Proof," while the 1970 model is marked "Water Resist."

right, I was just pointing it out. My 71 is also "resistant..."

 

[Clyde from Carolina]

Great info., gents. Much obliged. Can't believe I never researched this before now...