ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Ruff · 15 January 2010, 10:49 AM

Aside from the L being a newer model, and therefore having better resale value, is there any reason to go with a 312L instead of a K? I don't plan to sell it, I plan on giving it to my son in 22 years so I thought it would be fitting to choose the K since it corresponds with his birth year, but not if there is a reason to get the L. Also is there any added value to the K for being the first model year of the 312? Thanks.

Shade · 15 January 2010, 11:27 AM

Aside from the things you mentioned above, then there's nothing else.

With K being the first edition, you might get a higher "vintage" value in the future. But I wouldn't expect to get astronomical price differences or anything like that..

Shade · 15 January 2010, 11:27 AM

Aside from the things you mentioned above, then there's nothing else.

With K being the first edition, you might get a higher "vintage" value in the future. But I wouldn't expect to get astronomical price differences or anything like that..

m_reign · 15 January 2010, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shade

Aside from the things you mentioned above, then there's nothing else.

With K being the first edition, you might get a higher "vintage" value in the future. But I wouldn't expect to get astronomical price differences or anything like that..

What he said

inspires · 15 January 2010, 01:13 PM

No difference that I would see. If you're planning to giving it to your son, I would stick with his birth year. I'm sure he will wear it proud and nothing beats telling people that the watch was from Dad purchased as a Birth Year watch - that in my opinion is worth more than any incremental value you can get from resale.

Joey_V · 15 January 2010, 02:52 PM

K is the first and 1500 vs L with 2000 pieces. The older, the better (relatively).

Ruff · 15 January 2010, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joey_V

K is the first and 1500 vs L with 2000 pieces. The older, the better (relatively).

isn't K 2000 and L 2500?

dannyjak · 15 January 2010, 03:44 PM

Yeah I think K is 2000, says so on mine

Trurolexer · 15 January 2010, 07:59 PM

L is more new. So if you want to buy a 312 (again) better go for L. Good luck.

ForçaBarça · 16 January 2010, 04:38 AM

1) K 2000, L 2500
2) K is really from 2008, but delayed until 2009
3) L is the genuine 2009 serie

So better go for L (with more experience too)

A1000 · 16 January 2010, 05:09 AM

Either would be a great watch. I haven't heard any issues with either batch. So probably the sentimental reason that will be the decider.

15 January 2010, 10:49 AM	#1
Ruff Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: US Posts: 43	Any reason to pick a 312L over a 312K? Aside from the L being a newer model, and therefore having better resale value, is there any reason to go with a 312L instead of a K? I don't plan to sell it, I plan on giving it to my son in 22 years so I thought it would be fitting to choose the K since it corresponds with his birth year, but not if there is a reason to get the L. Also is there any added value to the K for being the first model year of the 312? Thanks.

15 January 2010, 01:13 PM	#5
inspires "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Real Name: Eric Location: Hong Kong Watch: 1665 Posts: 1,495	No difference that I would see. If you're planning to giving it to your son, I would stick with his birth year. I'm sure he will wear it proud and nothing beats telling people that the watch was from Dad purchased as a Birth Year watch - that in my opinion is worth more than any incremental value you can get from resale. __________________ _____________ All GREEN

15 January 2010, 02:52 PM	#6
Joey_V "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Joey Location: Dallas, TX Watch: SS Sub 16610 M Posts: 3,824	K is the first and 1500 vs L with 2000 pieces. The older, the better (relatively). __________________ Current Rotation: Rolex Submariner Date (M) - 1/08, Rolex Milgauss GV (V) - 2/10, Rolex SS Black Daytona (V) - 6/10, Rolex GMTIIC (G) - 5/11, TAG Heuer Silverstone (286/1860) - 1/2015 Former-watches: Omega PO/2535.80/2254, TAG Carrera/F1x2/Monaco, Panerai 312K/292L Wish List: Panerai 270/505, Rolex SMURF, Rolex RG Daytona, Rolex DSSD

16 January 2010, 05:09 AM	#11
A1000 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Adrian Location: UK Posts: 953	Either would be a great watch. I haven't heard any issues with either batch. So probably the sentimental reason that will be the decider. __________________ Rolex 16610LV (2007) PAM 312K (2009) PAM 292K (2009)

15 January 2010, 11:27 AM	#2
Shade "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Norman Location: Jakarta Watch: All of 'em.. Posts: 2,926	Aside from the things you mentioned above, then there's nothing else. With K being the first edition, you might get a higher "vintage" value in the future. But I wouldn't expect to get astronomical price differences or anything like that..

15 January 2010, 03:44 PM	#8
dannyjak "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Sydney Posts: 194	Yeah I think K is 2000, says so on mine

15 January 2010, 07:59 PM	#9
Trurolexer Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex Posts: 18,421	L is more new. So if you want to buy a 312 (again) better go for L. Good luck.

16 January 2010, 04:38 AM	#10
ForçaBarça Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Spain Watch: PAM 312L-TH CE1111 Posts: 17	1) K 2000, L 2500 2) K is really from 2008, but delayed until 2009 3) L is the genuine 2009 serie So better go for L (with more experience too)

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)