Merry Christmas!
Now— while there appears to be consensus that *On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is the James Bond story most tied to this blessed season, an irreconcilable divide must be acknowledged when it comes to the question of book [1] versus movie [2].
Irreconcilable when it comes to 007 watches, that is: The Christmastime wristwatch for the novel was an Explorer, on the big screen a pre-Daytona Chronograph.
Both from watchmaker Rolex.
Splitting the difference, as it were, I’m going to satisfy neither interest here and report on my recent experience with the “other” screen-worn reference. That would be the only one of the three not on the wrist of James Bond during the holiday.
I seldom draw from my personal collection to daily-wear a Rolex 5513 for any appreciable length of time. While I could see a case to be made that it was the quintessential “Universal Exports Stock” Submariner, none of those vintage screen-worn bracelets do well with my lifestyle — any time of year.
In this case, we’re talking mid-August through end of month in Michigan.
That was a hundred-plus days into an extended per period of wearing three different Submariner Dates in ad hoc rotations.
How did the no-date compare?
First, unless I was pointedly thinking about it, I hardly noticed any difference in out-and-about. No screen-correct James Bond Rolex shows discernable lume these days; so, nothing to see in the dark. Without relying upon scale for weight or calipers for measure, nothing feel, either.
I’d generally say the same of the 9315 bracelet on which I wore it, consistent with how the recurrent model was fitted for The Man with the Golden Gun (1974).
However, side-by-side next to either Licence to Kill (1989) timekeeper, superiority of the 93150 is obvious. Short of that, the most recent choice 5513 bracelet only struck me as more fragile when I removed it from my wrist (typically once per once per day).
Respecting its vintage condition, I have this particular piece routinely serviced, and, when necessary, repaired by a local AWCI member [3]. Again, because I so seldomly wear this one, data on accuracy is limited. But I’m used to gains of between 5½ and 6 seconds per day. Having worn it from August 13 to 29 this round, it settled-in to a range of +3 to +4½ in just under a week.
Regardless of a manufacture date well-over-a-half-century back now, there’s no place I went while wearing it where the watch in any way felt deficient. At one point I stepped-up as a shelter volunteer to wash dishes, and at the other extreme attended a formal affair held annually in this neck of the woods.
Never even thought about removing, babying, or switching-out wristwatches.
But it is not a modern wristwatch, will never perform like one, and couldn’t be confused for one. Neither is it, nor can it ever be what it once was when new.
Fauxtina [4] and the last couple of James Bond movies aside, time has moved-on past the Rolex 5513 Submariner. Sapphire crystal replaced acrylic and biccchierini indices are expected.
Hence it will remain “special occasion” status for me.
— Dell Deaton
off-site
References
- “Book Review: On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” / April 22, 2024 / Peter Nordgren / James Bond: The Spy Who Thrills Us (accessed December 22, 2025).
- “WTF Happened To On Her Majesty’s Secret Service?!” / December 19, 2025 / JoBlo Originals (via YouTube, accessed December 22, 2025).
- American Watchmakers-Clockmakers Institute (AWCI) (accessed December 25, 2025).
- “In-Depth: Fauxtina, The History And the Pros and Cons” / January 22, 2020 / Jack Forster / Hodinkee.