Rolex Service Polish Or Not Re Gold Submariner?

[RIPLEYXL9]

Actually is there a definitive book on all the features and quirky year changes in the Submariners.?

[JP Chestnut]

Originally Posted by RIPLEYXL9

Actually is there a definitive book on all the features and quirky year changes in the Submariners.?

Indeed there is - google "rolex submariner book" and you will find it.

Actually, here's a link to a review:
http://luxurytyme.com/en/rolex-book-...mariner-story/

[jackruff]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

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.

???? Yer the database is wrong......

Give the OP a PM he's looking to sell and I think your his guy.......

[bondtoys]

Originally Posted by RIPLEYXL9

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

The certificate from my K series Sea-Dweller (purchased 08/2002 from a german AD) looks exactly the same.

[bondtoys]

Originally Posted by jackruff

???? Yer the database is wrong......

Give the OP a PM he's looking to sell and I think your his guy.......

???? Yer, the certificate and Rolex HQs in Germany and the UK is wrong.......

Ok, let's assume for a second, that the OPs case has been done in 1991 and was sitting around for 10 years somewhere in the Rolex organisation and has been later fitted with a 2002 movement (you could also play this with a 1991 movement if you want) and a 2002 bracelet:

Please tell me EXACTLY, where the difference to a 2002 case/movement would be in terms of aging etc. - except for the lugholes which are a nice thing to me.

I'd just like to put all this serial-number internet hype (and that's really one imo) into a perspective

[jackruff]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

???? Yer, the certificate and Rolex HQs in Germany and the UK is wrong.......

Ok, let's assume for a second, that the OPs case has been done in 1991 and was sitting around for 10 years somewhere in the Rolex organisation and has been later fitted with a 2002 movement (you could also play this with a 1991 movement if you want) and a 2002 bracelet:

Please tell me EXACTLY, where the difference to a 2002 case/movement would be in terms of aging etc. - except for the lugholes which are a nice thing to me.

I'd just like to put all this serial-number internet hype (and that's really one imo) into a perspective

I don't know EXACTLY without doing the research which I'm not going to do with something that doesn't interest me that much. I'm not into gold watches. However I'm pretty sure the differences are very minor if at all. As we know Rolex more or less stick to their tried and proven designs/models year after year – something that makes the brand great. Also we know that there subtle differences in some watches of the same model and year. The fact remains that the commonly held serial no. to year’s data means the case was manufactured in 1991 irrespective of movement, band or what anyone says.
And for the record I’m not doing any bashing just asserting commonly held fact - something that seems to be missing in some of the posts.....

[Pleximannen]

Imho, it's quite simple: never polish. It doesn't look brand new after a polish - it looks
polished. In 9 cases out of 10, it's immediately visible imho. You lose the scratches but you also lose the sharpness/crispness of the case. It's just not worth it. Plus you lose the
patina which is part of the history of the watch, and why would you want to do that?
I don't understand polishing and I never will :)