I had always assumed I had a 1967 MF 5513 but...

[paltak]

Hi guys,

Need help verifying what I have. I bought what I always thought was a 1967 MF 5513 from another member almost 2.5 years ago. I had a local watchmaker who's been working on Rolex watches for 30+ years take a peek at the movement and gave me the thumps up, so I thought nothing of it.

This has been a great, very accurate watch but sadly it's only been worn mostly around the house. The patina pops in the outdoors and the gunmetal insert is so cool but sadly after 2+ years with it I'm convinced I'm just not a vintage guy. Today, I figured maybe it's time to let somebody else to enjoy this beauty.

After I took some pictures I'm glad I double checked the serial as I wasn't 100% certain if it was a 1967 or 1968. Lo and behold I was shocked to find that serial# 16006## dates to 1962!!! I'm glad I checked as I wouldn't want potential buyers to think that I'm being dishonest.

a) based on the pics below, is this a 1962 case with a later dial, hands, etc.?
b) if so, how might this impact the value (good or bad)?

Thanks in advance for your input! I suppose it was my bad for not having confirmed this 2+years ago

She's still a beauty and if this hurts the value, I wouldn't mind keeping her













The following pics are taken outdoors

[cajuntiger]

1,600,6xx is indeed 1967

[Old Expat Beast]

You're using a bad serial# table. Stick to this one, and you'll see your date is correct. http://vintagerolexforum.info/vrf/index3.html

[Lgear080]

Seriously nice piece whatever the production year

[paltak]

Whew! That is great news! Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!

I checked multiple sources online and they were all saying 1962. Here's one of them.

[Old Expat Beast]

I guessed that was the one you were using. Not the first time this has happened here with that particular dating tool.

See this thread, especially posts 15 & 16: http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=364357

[paltak]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I guessed that was the one you were using. Not the first time this has happened here with that particular dating tool.

See this thread, especially posts 15 & 16: http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=364357

Thank you so much, Adam!

[Beaumont Miller II]

Bob in addition a case from '62 would have pointed crown guards.

[pettai]

Adam, Bob

I find this site as quick & dirty check and then for detailed reference go to VRF link Adam posted(especially checking dial, case back etc)
http://oysterinfo.de/en/detailinfos/...mern/index.php

Best
dilip

[omitohud]

It's a beauty. U sure letting it go? U might regret it later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vincent65]

Gorgeous dial and patina, and good case. Insert is awesome.

[Smartyjones18]

Keep it, its so difficult to find one like yours. I would be first to buy if you ever want to sell.

[crowncollection]

Nice patina

[PoderEsBueno]

Nice one

[watchcrank]

I like that watch :-) Luck with sale, it should go fast. M

[esspee1200]

Great dial and patina on this one!

[rockmastermike]

birth year goodness - Good luck no matter what you choose

[Time Exposure]

You'll have buyers all over that one (if priced fairly). They are in demand and don't pop up every day.
Just remember that side of the equation if you ever change your mind and want one back!

[Dr.Smellody]

I had used the same wrong table and had assumed my 1,604,000 MF was from '63.
I was happy to find out it was from '67 and correct.