ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
11 February 2013, 09:30 AM | #31 | |
Banned
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
|
Quote:
It depends. If he sells it to someone who's simply interested in buying a gold Rolex, then X versus F (or whatever) isn't going to make a difference. If he sells to an informed enthusiast, then the update bracelet/clasp (if verified original) would increase value relative to a standard X watch. |
|
11 February 2013, 09:36 AM | #32 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Australia
Watch: eclectic..
Posts: 191
|
- If I'm correct X serial no. is second half of 1991 !!!!!
|
11 February 2013, 10:47 AM | #33 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Jason
Location: USA
Watch: Sea Dweller
Posts: 8,561
|
|
11 February 2013, 11:07 AM | #34 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Real Name: Bryan
Location: Pacific Northwest
Watch: YG DD lchdp
Posts: 2,963
|
That's one sexy sub!
|
11 February 2013, 12:43 PM | #35 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cave
Watch: Sundial
Posts: 33,940
|
Let the OP be. He can list his watch however he wants. It's not our place to police or judge his actions. The market will determine what happens to his sale. Regardless it's still a great looking gold sub! Let's just move on shall we?
|
11 February 2013, 12:52 PM | #36 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,125
|
OP,
I could have sold a brand new, unworn, unused with boxes/papers 18K Rolex Submariner with an "X" serial number today, and dated the warranty paper as February 10th, 2013. That doesn't mean the watch is 10 years old in 2023!!!
__________________
Quote:
|
|
11 February 2013, 01:04 PM | #37 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SoCal
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 1,308
|
Give the guy a break. I would say leave it unpolished, but if you're going to send it in to RSC for polishing, go for Bexley. They've got the proper lapping machine and can make your case sides/champfers the proper degree.
I saw an F serial Explorer II at my local Ben Bridge AD in Dec. 2011. No joke. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it myself. I started talking serial numbers with the sales folk and they looked at me like I was crazeeee. But I bet they sold it to a regular joe like 99.9% of the public who know nothing about serial number dating. It was brand new though with stickers and everything. So, do I doubt that the original poster bought his watch new in 2002? Not really, he probably did. But the fact of the matter is that folks on this forum and others reference the standard (unofficial) serial dating chart which dates the OP's watch to the early 1990s. I'm sure its in great shape though. And if the condition dictates, it should be worth just about the same as a 2002 model. With gold watches, condition is king because it's so damn easy to over polish and muck up the case. Leave it unpolished if you ask me. I'd take a 1992 unpolished example over a 2002 polished example most days, if not any day. |
11 February 2013, 01:11 PM | #38 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SoCal
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 1,308
|
And by the way, this is EXACTLY why Rolex is going to random serial numbers, but we all know that.
|
11 February 2013, 11:52 PM | #39 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BERKSHIRE UK
Watch: 16618 18ct Yellow
Posts: 49
|
Anybody know how to edit an earlier thread in this post as it seemed to have timed out, so there is no Edit button - actually I want to replace 2 of the the images
|
11 February 2013, 11:55 PM | #40 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Real Name: Rob
Location: Penna
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 1,658
|
If I was buying it I would not want it polished. Let the buyer make that decision.
__________________
Rolex Sub-126610LV Rolex Sub- 126613LB Rolex GMT BLRO 126710 Rolex GMT BLNR Rolex Datejust 16220 |
12 February 2013, 12:02 AM | #41 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,298
|
no polish
|
12 February 2013, 12:02 AM | #42 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,298
|
Why d'you sell your old man's 1675 GMT?!
|
12 February 2013, 12:11 AM | #43 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada
Watch: 116610LN
Posts: 1,594
|
OP should read this, RE: serial numbers.
Hope this helps with the confusion. http://www.qualitytyme.net/pages/numbers.html |
12 February 2013, 12:13 AM | #44 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 15,514
|
If done correctly, there is no reason not to polish it. Looking good is a priority in a luxury watch isn't it??
|
12 February 2013, 04:17 AM | #45 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: MJC
Location: PHL USA
Watch: IWC, Rolex, AP
Posts: 29,232
|
If they're only light scratches I'd leave them till you're ready to sell. They're more than likely to keep coming back.
__________________
|
12 February 2013, 04:29 AM | #46 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BERKSHIRE UK
Watch: 16618 18ct Yellow
Posts: 49
|
I wanted to buy a gold and steel submariner, to use as a second every day watch
Plus I was a completely unedjucated about the RSC working practices and therefore assumed anything that old was probably just about to keel over and die; or require an immensely expensive service. I didn't realise that when you put it in for the £445 full service - that includes a complete refurb externally, and brings the movement up to current as new specification. Hence they go on forever. I just liked the Gold and steel - as its really pretty so having the 16618 and Dad's in the safe at the same time just seemed pointless . Final slam was the insurance company slipped a clause in the renewal meaning despite the safe being certified for £40K in cash without a Premium excess, they now wanted premiums on all the watches 'mine and the wifes' re the all risks element. So 2 each is enough So when the nephew asked to buy it for what the dealers offered me for it - seemed perfect - stays in the family - by then I'd put it throught a major service at Rolex, So has a 2 year g'tee for him and looks perfect other than some bracelet wear but Rolex said it wouldn't break (something for him to save up for). |
12 February 2013, 04:40 AM | #47 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 2,177
|
Mike, your the man..Thanks for putting some perspective into the situation here...
__________________
116718LN Black dial |
12 February 2013, 04:48 AM | #48 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BERKSHIRE UK
Watch: 16618 18ct Yellow
Posts: 49
|
Fathers sold! for Vincent65
|
12 February 2013, 04:49 AM | #49 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Real Name: Paul
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 14,578
|
Good to see the papers.
They suit a 1991 watch. |
12 February 2013, 06:09 AM | #50 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BERKSHIRE UK
Watch: 16618 18ct Yellow
Posts: 49
|
Quote:
But hell this guy just picked on me and seemed to stalk me from post to post. It also raises pretty interesting stock write off issues and advice for new Rolex owners [re your list of pieces, I'm sure you would be able to comprehend the true finacial ramifications I'm alluding to here] - well lets say Rolex are not ignoring me! So then I like noticed he was sitting on the can in his avatar. I just couldn't resist it. I know its wrong but... It's just, it so reminded me of this road movie I once saw; where this girl stopped at a service station, it was like in the middle of knowwhere and she asked if she could use the loo. When the attendant said "sorry we don't have one". She replied "how long is your shift"; and he replied ohh 8 to 9 hours. So she retorted "Ahhh 8 hours and no John, umm I guess that explains how come you are so full of sh*t". [interestng to see how long he takes to change his AVATAR] |
|
12 February 2013, 06:19 AM | #51 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BERKSHIRE UK
Watch: 16618 18ct Yellow
Posts: 49
|
OK being serious guys.
Thank you for all the valuable insight into what should I do. With no offence meant to those who said let Rolex Polish it. I took it to a Jewellers today, who's Master watch maker used to work at Rolex. And he said if it's polished right with the right lapping machines [like the ones Rolex UK have] then the profile angles can be maintainedand definitely no harm can be done. He also warned me he'd seen gold watches that had obviously been polished with stainless steel pads - and " massacred" them. I appreciate my photos aren't great but in the flesh he said leave it alone as it looks in great condition for 11 years [ouch! here come the rednecks]. He also pointed out that the £455 full service in the UK could, absolutely without a shadow of a doubt, make this look like brand new in box. Plus he said that service really got the movement up to 100% perfection. As he pointed out hell if they don't believe it, knock the £455 off the absolute top price and send it in to Rolex - as it then comes out with a 2 year G'tee. So it stays unpolished! I see his logic but the big thing is if I we are wrong it can always be polished by Rolex next week but if I polish it now it can never be unpolished! |
12 February 2013, 06:39 AM | #52 | |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Jason
Location: USA
Watch: Sea Dweller
Posts: 8,561
|
Quote:
|
|
12 February 2013, 06:40 AM | #53 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Jason
Location: USA
Watch: Sea Dweller
Posts: 8,561
|
|
12 February 2013, 12:30 PM | #54 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: David
Location: australia
Posts: 20,216
|
"If you doubt my logic - ask yourself why did Rolex in 2010 introduce the secret algorithym based serial number system! To precisely allow them to continue this practice. And hey, I as an owner support them 100% - excellent idea."
only a matter of time until it's cracked, it just a code and the mathamaticians are working on it. There are valid reasons for both points of view here. If the watch was sold in 2001 it is new in every sense at that time, never worn and the movement does not have any miles on it so to speak, 2 year warranty it's new, but the case was stamped far before that, why it sat around for so long who knows. Your problem is that as you can see from general consensus of rolex owners here on this site alone your watch is 1991-3 to most, wether that is the way you see and rolex see it or not. I too would class your watch from 1991-3 on the resale market, regardless of the paperwork which is the older style by the way. I agree the watch may have been new when you got it and no model changes occurred so no biggie, but to those who will look to buy the watch at sale time it's a 1991-3. I think you got somewhat duped imho and i have empathy for you, i would have checked the serial on the papers at the time myself. Anyway enjoy the watch. just my two cents
__________________
watches many |
12 February 2013, 06:15 PM | #55 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: World
Watch: 16750
Posts: 2,733
|
Tbh, I don't understand the constant bashing on Ripleyxl9.
1. Ask yourself, what equipment you all had in 2002 and how often you have used the internet for research. 2. I can see often the "internet hype" remark regarding serial numbers and production date. It seems to be consense that these numbers give a rough indicator of when the case has been used, but don't give a clear indicator for the real age of a watch. Additionally I think, that we can all agree that YG Submariners where not the hottest sellers back then - not for Rolex Germany and not for a particular jeweller. 3. It seems als to be consense that a watch is considered as being new at the moment when it's been sold by the AD and the certificate is dated and stamped. 4. The OP provided his certificate for the X-serial Sub dated March 2002, so to me, the watch is from March 2002 and I could care less what an internet database says. |
12 February 2013, 09:31 PM | #56 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Real Name: Brett
Location: Bahrain, Dubai
Watch: Rolex and AP
Posts: 5,538
|
No polishing for me....if you sell, let the buyer polish if he/she wishes.....just my 2c
|
13 February 2013, 03:05 AM | #57 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: Chris
Location: San antonio, TX
Watch: 116610LV
Posts: 2,143
|
Quote:
|
|
13 February 2013, 04:19 AM | #58 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BERKSHIRE UK
Watch: 16618 18ct Yellow
Posts: 49
|
Quote:
Many Thanks to Stephen the Moderator for removing the image with the Serial No. But have down loaded the one with a partial serial number so anyone being dragged back to this thread can see the point re the Warrnaty Card I would also be extremely interested in seeing, what these cards looked like in other 2002 watches, especially on solid Gold Submariners or solid gold GMT's [nb remeber to remove some od the serial no unlike clutz me]. Only asked as one guy kindly sent me photos of his but I think they were American. Interested Particularly in German Ones. or French ones i.e. in French. Trying to learn about this very important asked of proving provence as it effects values. Quick update, Rolex UK have committed to providing me with a letter confirming my watch is a 2002 model and that was sent to Germany in late 2001. Obviously I'll await that with interest. Just out of interest if one has a 1991 serial number on a late 2001 built watch, with confirmation from Rolexnat Director level; that it is a unique one off "2002" watch , with a 2001 bracelet, movement, case and papers BUT, with a serial number usually issued in 1991. Does that make it ultra valuable as an 'UBER' unique collectors item, with absolutely incontestable documentation of provenance! ;) ;) :) |
|
13 February 2013, 04:19 AM | #59 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Watch: 116719BLRO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
I thought 18K Subs and YM had always had SEL, like this from 1978 http://www.chrono24.com/en/rolex/rol...-id2283450.htm 1985 http://www.chrono24.com/en/rolex/sub...Fref-16808.htm |
|
13 February 2013, 04:48 AM | #60 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: BERKSHIRE UK
Watch: 16618 18ct Yellow
Posts: 49
|
Quote:
Its an interesting picture, however could you be sure those were with SELs [looks a bit like they are] Apart from its just that there is a pretty big gap between the outside of the alledged SELs and the inside of the casing lugs on both side. I'm getting so cynical about the integrity of the whole industry. One starts to think, is it with SEL's or is it just the photo? Or was that Subs case so totally worn out they had to replace the whole bracelet and put on one with SELs and thats why there is such a large gap. Or is the gap there becuase of overpolishing to hide the wear. On mine its got that perfect snug fit which totally avoids bracelet wear-slap. But then the second picture looks like no gap. I'd love to know for sure about SELs ie. the year they came in. Mind you I'd say mine was better condition than both of these and younger in any event and the best I've been offerred is £10,000 So fed up with the whole thiing I'll trade it tomorrow. Then I'll go hunting for the ultimate peachy Randon Serial 116618. And just move on. Sure the German dealer will make amends. And are you the real Chuck Finlay in "Burn Notice"? :) (I'm a real fan!) |
|
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.