ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
8 June 2014, 04:57 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: USA
Watch: Rolex/Tudor
Posts: 13
|
RE: Vintage Subs
I am looking to purchase a vintage sub and have narrowed it down to either the 16610 versus the tudor 9411/0. A lot of people will say "just go for the 16610" but it is a watch that just about everyone has and I do like the snowflake hands.
If I end up getting the tudor, can anyone enlighten me on the potential down sides (eg. lume, resale value, accuracy, etc.) |
8 June 2014, 05:14 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Jay
Location: TEXAS
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 7,648
|
Neither vintage IMO.
|
8 June 2014, 05:33 AM | #3 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Lee
Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48
Watch: Too many to list!
Posts: 33,697
|
Wow, there are so many 16610s out there I never considered them really vintage. On the other hand I don't really think that Tudors measure up for me. I looked at the 16610 and ended liking the looks of the no dates better.
|
8 June 2014, 05:43 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Real Name: Flavio
Location: N/A
Posts: 14,654
|
Any Sub without a solid bracelet with glidelock clasp is vintage. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
|
8 June 2014, 05:45 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Tom
Location: In a race car!
Watch: ME RACE PORSCHES
Posts: 24,123
|
Vintage forum possibly more helpful?
|
8 June 2014, 05:50 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: Gold Sub 116618LN
Posts: 2,820
|
I would consider anything BEFORE the 16610 vintage. The 16610 was only discontinued a few years ago.
__________________
Things are more like they are now than they ever were before. |
8 June 2014, 06:13 AM | #7 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,024
|
Since the Tudor you are considering is approaching the 40 y.o. mark, I'd say it fit the vintage bill. 9411/0 was produced circa. 1975-76. The "snowflake" markers and hands make it a more interesting piece IMHO.
As for collectibility, neither will be rare for many decades to come - but there were fewer 9411/0's were produced in those 2 years than the millions of 16610's. And that fact could play a role in getting future parts for the Tudor if you plan to keep it for several decades. Good luck on the hunt for a decent one of either marque - condition and authenticity will be your biggest challenge...
__________________
Does anyone really know what time it is? |
8 June 2014, 07:09 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: USA
Watch: Rolex/Tudor
Posts: 13
|
perhaps I should be considering a 1680 red sub then...
|
8 June 2014, 07:23 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Jay
Location: TEXAS
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 7,648
|
|
8 June 2014, 07:52 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2009
Real Name: Michael
Location: S.Florida/Ontario
Watch: 6263, 1675
Posts: 2,259
|
Yes, depends on you budget of course. Red 1680 more than twice as much as the Tudor
__________________
life is good |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.