1970s OysterQuartz

[modee]

I accumulated three of these. All three are from 1978-9

The diamond dial MOP one is ref. 17000.

Two Tone ref. 17013

Also another stainless 17000.

Had the batteries removed as I do not wear these lately.

[Haywood_Milton]

Hey? That MOP / diamond dial in the 17000 ?

H

[modee]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

Hey? That MOP / diamond dial in the 17000 ?

H

Yup MOP diamond 17000. All factory as far as I know.

[ar.parask13]

I really like the third one!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shawnmarz]

I love the oysterquartz!
Second one is close to what Tupac had. I'm trying to find a similar one with the dial his had!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[77T]

A sort of OQ 3-some frozen in time.
A good representation of Rolex's reaction to a technical challenge from the revolution in timekeeping movements...

[Haywood_Milton]

I regret to say that I do not believe the first dial to be of original Rolex manufacture.

Haywood

[crowncollection]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

I regret to say that I do not believe the first dial to be of original Rolex manufacture.

Haywood

X 2 or is not an original dial IMHO
Slate diamond dial was the only oyster Quartz dial available on steel models to my knowledge


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by crowncollection

X 2 or is not an original dial IMHO
Slate diamond dial was the only oyster Quartz dial available on steel models to my knowledge


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And was even that reserved for only the 17014 (steel and white metal)?

H

[crowncollection]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

And was even that reserved for only the 17014 (steel and white metal)?



H

The slate was available on 17000 and 17014 cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by crowncollection

The slate was available on 17000 and 17014 cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder if the title on that section of the master catalogue is deceptive. Diamond dials are usually reserved exclusively for models with at least some precious metal content. A price list showing it available as a standard configuration would convince me.......and if there's one chap who'd have such a price list, it's you, CC !

It's no surprise, however, that we agree about the first dial in this thread :-(

Haywood

[modee]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

I regret to say that I do not believe the first dial to be of original Rolex manufacture.

Haywood

The diamonds on it dazzle dance in the light like the diamonds on my other factory Rolexes, that beautiful near flawless bright color we all know and love, that's why I believe it to be factory.


As far as this statement: "Diamond dials are usually reserved exclusively for models with at least some precious metal content." here is my 2009 116234, a little gold on the fluted bezel, but nothing to speak of:

[crowncollection]

Originally Posted by modee

The diamonds on it dazzle dance in the light like the diamonds on my other factory Rolexes, that beautiful near flawless bright color we all know and love, that's why I believe it to be factory.


As far as this statement: "Diamond dials are usually reserved exclusively for models with at least some precious metal content." here is my 2009 116234, a little gold on the fluted bezel, but nothing to speak of:

your 16234 is not an exclusively steel watch, it is quite different when a white gold bezel is present, As for your oyster quartz how can the dial be original on your oyster quartz when they never made anything but a slate diamond dial on 17014 or 17000 ???

point number two that larger squarer setting was not introduced by rolex until well after the oysterquartz was discontinued ???? infact in the mid 90's

[speedolex]

Was there an automatic version of watch #2? I could swear my wife's cousin has that watch but not quartz, I thought it was Oyster Perpetual.

[shawnmarz]

Originally Posted by speedolex

Was there an automatic version of watch #2? I could swear my wife's cousin has that watch but not quartz, I thought it was Oyster Perpetual.

The Ref. 1530 are pretty identical in design.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by shawnmarz

The Ref. 1530 are pretty identical in design.

Excellent, thanks!

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by speedolex

Excellent, thanks!

...and the 1530 (bicolour 1630) can be worth a lot more than the similar Oysterquartz.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

...and the 1530 (bicolour 1630) can be worth a lot more than the similar Oysterquartz.

He's got a 1630, very interesting. Thanks for the info.

[Kingsking]

wouldnt happen to have one of those 17013 links for sale?

[modee]

It's an interesting discussion, but as Hunter S Thompson's attorney might say (whacking the side of the Great Red Shark), I know what I have here!





Plus my point is that it is a Rolex factory diamond dial. Whether it was originally on the watch or not, is your debate.

[crowncollection]

Originally Posted by modee

It's an interesting discussion, but as Hunter S Thompson's attorney might say (whacking the side of the Great Red Shark), I know what I have here!





Plus my point is that it is a Rolex factory diamond dial. Whether it was originally on the watch or not, is your debate.

With oyster-quartz written on it ??? Rolex never made a dial for your model like this. I have provided you pics of the dial catalogue showing what was available. At best you have an original dial plate that is resprayed and if lucky, original Rolex set diamonds still in place. It's not possible it came from the Rolex factory that way end of story. A close up of the diamond setting and I could tell you if those diamonds were originally set by Rolex and its just resprayed if that helps Cheers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Haywood_Milton]

"The diamonds on it dazzle dance in the light like the diamonds on my other factory Rolexes, that beautiful near flawless bright color we all know and love, that's why I believe it to be factory."

Sadly, that is no way to determine if a dial is original from Rolex.

We might instead look at printing typography, the date window, the position, orientation and setting style of the diamonds, contemporary master catalogues etc.......and I remain convinced beyond any doubt that this dial did not leave Rolex in this form :



As David suggests, a good and in-focus close up (even such as may be taken with a steady hand and an iPhone) might be helpful for others to reach the same conclusion.

Does that bottom leg of the "Y" in Oysterquartz really swing out like a flamenco-dancer's leg, rather than dropping vertically?

Would Rolex really have allowed the diamond at 7 o'clock to sit so out of position between the minute markers?

Are the lines of text parallel?

Let's see that "T SWISS T" at the bottom.

Is it camera distortion that makes the "X" of "ROLEX" top heavy?

Separately, have we ever seen Mother of Pearl that is such a flat white colour?

Having posted here and stated that it is a Rolex factory dial unfortunately invites such questions.

Great watches, but I think you need to be prepared to rethink that dial.

I would also be interested to learn where it come from and what the seller claimed about the dial.

Thankyou,

Haywood

[crowncollection]

[QUOTE=Haywood_Milton;6801967][I]"The diamonds on it dazzle dance in the light like the diamonds on my other factory Rolexes, that beautiful near flawless bright color we all know and love, that's why I believe it to be factory."

Sadly, that is no way to determine if a dial is original from Rolex

I 100% agree

The above theory by the other person is clearly incorrect and is flawed way to identify a factory diamond dial as stated by Haywood.

Here are Two dials sent off for independent evaluation, I will let the other person interpret the results. One dial is aftermarket called Geneva collection and one is marked factory.


Cheers.
.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[modee]

Since so many posted on the sujet, I will retort, explanatorily only. If I'm thinking of buying a watch or need opinions, I'll post as many pics as needed. Otherwise, I try never to post more than one pic of any watch I already own. I don't need the opinions because I already know what I have, so I'm just posting for people like me to view and admire.

For example the Daytona 6239 I posted I've been flooded with inquiries from people wanting to buy it, but I just write back say no, it is not for sale at this time. Some requested more pics of the watch. I said no, and anyway, I'm not selling it so why go to the trouble. I could easily see someone using those extra pics to try to scam someone.

I've had some guy in Marblehead, MA once lift the pics I was posting and then try to sell the watches that I posted to some unsuspecting buyer. I've thought about putting a watermark on 'em but then, one pic, no big deal. In that instance I had posted many pics - a mistake. Try not to do that again.

Another time some scammer offered to sell me a watch and when I asked for details of it, he gave an online Rolex dealer MY FAX number to which to FAX paperwork for the watch. Luckily some of the watch dealers online know me and know my phone numbers so the dealer contacted me immediately via email and advised me of the ongoing scam.

I don't want to be a part of that so you will usually not see more than one pic of my watches.

It's factory. All my stuff is, as far as I know. I haven't had this watch appraised, but I had another appraised where I was a little in doubt about the origin of the bracelet and dial. In that case turns out I just didn't know that particular watch as well as I should or could, as it turned out to be clearly all factory.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by modee

Since so many posted on the sujet, I will retort, explanatorily only. If I'm thinking of buying a watch or need opinions, I'll post as many pics as needed. Otherwise, I try never to post more than one pic of any watch I already own. I don't need the opinions because I already know what I have, so I'm just posting for people like me to view and admire.

For example the Daytona 6239 I posted I've been flooded with inquiries from people wanting to buy it, but I just write back say no, it is not for sale at this time. Some requested more pics of the watch. I said no, and anyway, I'm not selling it so why go to the trouble. I could easily see someone using those extra pics to try to scam someone.

I've had some guy in Marblehead, MA once lift the pics I was posting and then try to sell the watches that I posted to some unsuspecting buyer. I've thought about putting a watermark on 'em but then, one pic, no big deal. In that instance I had posted many pics - a mistake. Try not to do that again.

Another time some scammer offered to sell me a watch and when I asked for details of it, he gave an online Rolex dealer MY FAX number to which to FAX paperwork for the watch. Luckily some of the watch dealers online know me and know my phone numbers so the dealer contacted me immediately via email and advised me of the ongoing scam.

I don't want to be a part of that so you will usually not see more than one pic of my watches.

It's factory. All my stuff is, as far as I know. I haven't had this watch appraised, but I had another appraised where I was a little in doubt about the origin of the bracelet and dial. In that case turns out I just didn't know that particular watch as well as I should or could, as it turned out to be clearly all factory.

You can post a clearer pic of that dial easily and with no fear of being scammed.

[Haywood_Milton]

Evidence has been shown, facts and flaws have been pointed out and reasonable questions asked in a civil manner by members (of no small experience) who confidently determine the dial to be incorrect and have been willing to suggest why.

It is entirely your prerogative to decide whether or not to engage with such discussion as posting a watch on a vintage Rolex forum might invite.

I have a couple of mediocre vintage Rolex models myself and if someone were to suggest that one were not correct I would be rushing to engage, post further pictures and discuss the facts.

The Oysterquartz are increasingly going to be interesting, if expensive to service, vintage pieces. I wish you luck with your collection.

Haywood M

[rusty427]

To the OP, they are nice watches.
I have a real liking for the Oysterquartz, thanks for posting.
Even if the MOP dial is not factory, it has a sweet look. Hopefully you don't have a premium invested in it.
This thread has been an interest to me. This then prompted me to have a google around.
I did find one for sale similar to yours,
http://www.chrono24.com.au/rolex/oys...-id3358392.htm
Also
http://www.capetownstore.com/repair/repairdia.html
If it is one of their watches or similar, so be it. It still has some province and fits in to your collection nicely.
The collective knowledge on this forum from members like Haywood and David is immense, and I suppose that knowledge can bring some disappointment at times.
If it was my watch, I would try to find out a bit more about its manufacture, and except it for what it is, or perhaps try and return it to it original configuration.
You have a great collection, thanks for sharing and enjoy.

[modee]

Interesting, yes, although here
http://www.chrono24.com.au/rolex/oys...-id3358392.htm
the description and caption is of an OysterQuartz, but on the dial, the words Oyster Perpetual.
Same here that same watch right on Capetown's own website:
http://www.capetownstore.com/Merchan...Category_Code=
--- that dial doesn't look right at all, it doesn't even seem to have the word Quartz anywhere on it.


Capetown looks like it has or had a few 1980s or 1990s OysterQuartz Datejusts none over there currently from the '70s.

I've had these three watches since about 2009. They are not from C.Town.

Thanks!

[crowncollection]

I give up trying to help here, the facts are the facts, it's not original the text is horrible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[modee]

Give it a rest.

You old windbag.



http://movie-sounds.org/download#L3F...5kYmFnLm1wMw==