Vintage is not for me. Anyone else feel the same way?

[RCrusoe]

I've just gotten back into watch collecting and have picked up a new watch for the first time in a little while. I've recently ended up adding a 6-digit (modern) Daytona to my collection but my intention was initially to find something vintage. I've recently celebrated a milestone and was looking at a "birth year" watch from the late 70s.

In particular I was looking at possibly picking up a Sub or GMT master from this era. I've been looking quite extensively both in North America and Europe, have tried on a number of watches, and have now realized that I don't think that I could ever be happy with a vintage Rolex from the 70s.

After having picked so many up and tried so many on I just can't seem to get over how "light" they feel and how the bracelets don't have any heft at all and feel like scrap metal (tin) to me. I know the price of these watches is often many times what new references cost but I just can't seem to get over the fact that every other modern watch I own feels more substantial than a vintage Rolex from the 70s.

Although I know watch collecting is far from rational, I just can't seem to get over how light some of the watches feel. I can't even imagine paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a Daytona from the 70s without any of the modern weight/heft...

Are there any others in the same predicament?

[Dsmith1974]

I think 5 digits is the sweet spot for subs and GMTs.

[djgallo]

Weight is just one consideration. Some people like lighter watches, while some prefer a little more heft....

Vintage is another issue. If you are going to buy vintage....better know what you are doing.....there are a LOT of land mines....

Less involved buying modern.....

[RolexNorth]

Yeah, I've never thought once about buying vintage. Not my deal. You're likely buying a watch that was abused by the previous owner as no one could see the future collectability of the brand. To polish it and clean it up makes it that much lighter. I think besides vintage collectors, the only other person who'd buy one is someone who has allergies to 904 SS in the current models and needs one that was made back in the day in 314.

[garbanzo]

I also prefer new references. For me the problem with vintage is that I lack the expertise to be convinced that everything is as it should on a decades-old watch.

[Hogtown Fatty]

i come from a guitar buying/selling/trading background where vintage is seen by most as the pinnacle, but frankly, it scares the $hit out of me because i see it as a ticking time bomb, especially on things like amplifiers (of course electronics/pickups inside a guitar can and do die as well)... and watches are no different. as a result, i never gave vintage ones a second look, however lately have developed quite a thirst for a clean old 5513... but as in guitars, i'm torn as to whether to look for the cleanest one i can find, knowing that service will be required at some point- it's inevitable on any mechanical thing- or to find a "beater" and just live happily knowing it's lead a full life and had all servicing done and just enjoy it. i'll likely stay away from vintage watches for the time being as i'm so new to watches (only just got my first watch/rolex at the start of the month), but will keep absorbing knowledge and maybe get into some pieces later on- i have time.

[envuks]

My personal preference is modern models. I’ve been toying with the idea of a birth year vintage, but part of me thinks I like the idea more than I’ll like the watch.

I had a 16610lv for a year around 2007/8. Never could get past the clasp. Just killed the watch for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sambb]

i dont necessarily collect vintage... but its funny that a red sub from the 70s isnt much more than a SS hulk from a gray. I also think its funny that people look at modern SS rolex as an investment. nevertheless i like modern better because i like to wear them, not because it is a future collectable. i agree that i like the look of modern better.
i am the same way about cars. i dont get the attraction to a 70s sports car.

[stratguy]

Buying vintage watches is like buying vintage guitars. It's very easy to be taken.

[sensui]

It's not for everyone. Beyond the personal preferences, it's also a lot more challenging/time consuming to do research and find the right watch. It's different from the "as long as you got enough money" you can get it modern watches as you have to understand what you're buying. So pick and choose your battles, definitely not for everyone.

[77T]

Then I guess a birth year watch is no longer an option for you.

Based on your search you’d have been looking at 4-digit models. They were made with enough metal to last 5+ decades (or you wouldn’t have been able to try one on).

But I respect your preference for bigger cases and thicker bracelets. For me, I’ve collected many vintage models and they are lighter. But I happen to like the diverse lightness of being aged for many decades. Svelte you might say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[michael8238]

Same for me.
Too valuable and too fragile to enjoy on my wrist.

[cerendigit]

Yeah, I can't give up on the modern Rolex's clasps and bracelets.

[glamorama]

I think to really appreciate vintage watches or cars it has to be something that you saw as kid growing up and always wanted or that reminds of your family member. Then when you reach a certain age and get nostalgic and can afford it you buy it. If there are many people that feel the same prices go up. I grew up with Omega being the bond watch so I don’t get that nostalgic over old submariners.

I might be wrong here and sure there are exceptions but fairly certain I’m right on a macro level.

[AF_Rob]

I appreciate vintage for the design and owned one for a few years. I found myself babying it and avoided wearing it in favor for more solid pieces. I eventually sold it, in favor of a modern variant.

I prefer 5 digit over 6 but I don't consider them vintage quite yet. When I think vintage, I think pie pan dials and plastic glass.

[101031-28]

Something very nostalgic for me about the 4 digits... I discovered Rolex in the mid-late 80s so transitional references are my sweet spot, 16660, 16800, 16550 and 16750.. They are lighter and quite comfortable for every day wear. I still enjoy my modern 6 digit professionals, but the 5 digits gets most of the wear time these days.

[RCrusoe]

Originally Posted by envuks

My personal preference is modern models. I’ve been toying with the idea of a birth year vintage, but part of me thinks I like the idea more than I’ll like the watch.

I had a 16610lv for a year around 2007/8. Never could get past the clasp. Just killed the watch for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm really surprised that there are so many others that feel the same way. I thought I'd definitely be the outlier.

I haven't discounted vintage (birth year) entirely but I also think I'm more in love with the "idea" of a birth year watch than the actual watch itself.

[MTdweller]

Although I can appreciate those who have a taste for vintage watches, I prefer the heavier feel and technological advancements incorporated into the modern Rolex lineup. But we all have different tastes, and that is what makes this forum so interesting.

[lamnyc]

As much as I loved vintage watches, I’m too ocd. I’ll be constantly checking on every daily scratches after wearing it.

[NYG1121]

Vintage collecting is all about the history of the particular watch. If it doesn’t make you geek out everytime you tell someone the story behind that particular watch then vintage collecting isnt for you. There is something so awesome about wearing a 40 yr old watch and looks almost like the current model but has that beautiful patina and wear to go with it. I prefer to have both old and new and they serve a different purpose.

[abozz]

I wear Rolex watches for 30 years or more. And nothing like the quality and felling of a modern Rolex for me, vintage are beautiful, patina, etc, but I'm not rich, I have to choice the best for my taste in a small collection (2 watches), and that is a modern Rolex.

Enviado desde mi SM-G975F mediante Tapatalk

[GradyPhilpott]

I have no problem buying vintage watches.

It's something of a minefield, compared to shopping at an AD, but if you trust your seller and the price is right, some mighty fine watches can be had.

Isn't it funny how those lightweight, tinny watches of yore are still looking good and running well after decades of neglect and abuse?

[Nikrnic]

Even for buying a 5 digit Rolex you need to do your homework and have patience.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[fania123]

Originally Posted by Dsmith1974

I think 5 digits is the sweet spot for subs and GMTs.

This

[nick800]

The bracelets are awful

[dardeca]

I wear mostly modern Rolex models, but I love a red 1680.

[illiguy]

I tried vintage. Too many trappings unless an expert (in my view) and other pain points. I’ve committed to keeping things modern only. Do love the aesthetic and charm of vintage, don’t get me wrong.

[brandrea]

I love the idea of vintage watches, but prefer modern. To each their own

[csaltphoto]

I don't really consider late model 5 digits vintage either. Just different aesthetics but full modern materials/movements/etc. When you get into the older tritium dials though I lose interest. No lume, flaking paint, etc. And then the older 4 digits. It's fascinating to see some of these old watches still going strong but to me they are just old watches and the premiums they command blow my mind. I can certainly appreciate the historic significance of some of them though.

[marcusp23]

Plenty of room for both modern and vintage