OP Date 1500 with odd lume placement

[astrobuoy0]

Hey all,

I'm new to the forums and am in the process of purchasing my first Rolex, as a marker of my 40th and almost completing my first book. My taste runs to vintage in general and I've found myself gravitating specifically to 60s era Oyster Precisions and Perpetuals. I came across one particular ref. 1500 and haven't been able to stop thinking about it. It's got dauphine hands, which I love, long thin batons and some nice sunburst showing through on the dial. It's a little more than I was hoping to pay, but the movement was just serviced, and to my eye the case, dial, hands and lume all look to be in great shape.

From what I've gathered the seller is trustworthy and doesn't engage in redials, and the indications of the date (Swiss marking at 6 o'clock, 1560 movement engraving and matching balance wheel bridge, '65 caseback stamp though I don't have the exact serial number) seem right. I love the unusual combo of dial and hands, and haven't seen other examples of 1500s like this, but that's also what gives me pause. Primarily this: has anyone ever seen a lume plot placed ABOVE the Rolex crown logo, and also NOT below 6 o'clock at the Swiss marking? I truly don't mind the look of it, and maybe I'm being overly paranoid (and maybe at the end of the day it doesn't matter if I like the watch), but I suppose since it's my first Rolex and a major investment for me, I'd like to know. Also for the sake of learning more, I figured I would ask! Maybe this is something more common than I thought?

[CTech]

Apart from the irregularities in the dial lume you have noted, there might be some other issues with this watch that need investigation.

Having access to the serial number would help, but with the information available I would be questioning why a watch with a 1965 case back has dauphine hands.

If the watch is a very early 1500 model from 1962/63 then dauphine hands would be appropriate, but I don't think 1965 watches were fitted with these originally.

The questions then are to sort out whether the case is from 1962 or so with a later case back or is it a 1965 watch with the wrong hands, or is it an assembled watch with an assortment of parts.

Whichever it is, more photos would help a lot and you are right to be very suspicious of the dial as it doesn't resemble any of the period Rolex dials in several ways.

[astrobuoy0]

Originally Posted by CTech

Apart from the irregularities in the dial lume you have noted, there might be some other issues with this watch that need investigation.

Having access to the serial number would help, but with the information available I would be questioning why a watch with a 1965 case back has dauphine hands.

If the watch is a very early 1500 model from 1962/63 then dauphine hands would be appropriate, but I don't think 1965 watches were fitted with these originally.

The questions then are to sort out whether the case is from 1962 or so with a later case back or is it a 1965 watch with the wrong hands, or is it an assembled watch with an assortment of parts.

Whichever it is, more photos would help a lot and you are right to be very suspicious of the dial as it doesn't resemble any of the period Rolex dials in several ways.

Thank you! I'll ask for the full serial if I can, but I know that it starts 11xxxxx which I believe would place it in 1965 as well?

It's a shame if it's a franken, as I'm particularly after dauphine- or alpha-style hands. I don't know what it is but I love the look of them.

I would send the direct link to the original site but since I'm still new to TRF I don't have sufficient privileges yet. Photo attachments will have to do!

[astrobuoy0]

Some more photos:

[Nick9]

I’m not sure that dial/hands changes on these makes them “frankens”.

For many years, among four-digit Rolexes, it was common for jewellers to give customer the dial they wanted, and swap them again later on if the customer wanted a new look.

For lots of us, this doesn’t make a big difference — like those long ago customers, if we like the look of a vintage DJ, that’s usually enough.

I’d be glad to learn that the hands are original, but even if not that’s an attractive watch. Certainly authentic Rolex, and I personally I like the look of the dauphine hands. My own collection has DJs with those, and with baton hands.

[astrobuoy0]

Originally Posted by Nick9

I’m not sure that dial/hands changes on these makes them “frankens”.

For many years, among four-digit Rolexes, it was common for jewellers to give customer the dial they wanted, and swap them again later on if the customer wanted a new look.

For lots of us, this doesn’t make a big difference — like those long ago customers, if we like the look of a vintage DJ, that’s usually enough.

I’d be glad to learn that the hands are original, but even if not that’s an attractive watch. Certainly authentic Rolex, and I personally I like the look of the dauphine hands. My own collection has DJs with those, and with baton hands.

Thanks for your insight, that's really helpful to know! I have heard to expect more variations among the four-digit Rolexes, but I wanted to make sure from more knowing eyes that there wasn't anything egregiously fishy. I also find the watch really attractive!

My other concern right now is that I'm not sure about the timegrapher reading. I'm trying to get an actual screenshot (I've been emailing with a sales person), but they're reporting results of +20s/d as an average of flat, crown up, and crown down, and an average amplitude of 260. That seems a little low for a watch that was just serviced, but I don't know what I should expect from a 1560 movement? I'm also trying to find out what the beat error is. Hopefully under 0.1ms. Does that seem within reason, or am I expecting too much?