ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

alanc · 4 July 2013, 01:57 AM

I will eventually get a Sub - either a 16610 or a 16613. To me, the Sub is a tool watch so I should go for the 16610, but the 16613 is just so beautiful that I may not be able to resist it.

However, in keeping with the tool theme, in either event I will want one with lug holes.

Here's the question - can anyone tell me during what serial number run(s), the 16610 and 16613 lost their lug holes?

Thanks in advance!

ViperB · 4 July 2013, 02:23 AM

I think early Y serial. I have a Y 16618 with lug holes. I've seen Y 16618 also without.

padi56 · 4 July 2013, 02:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanc

I will eventually get a Sub - either a 16610 or a 16613. To me, the Sub is a tool watch so I should go for the 16610, but the 16613 is just so beautiful that I may not be able to resist it.

However, in keeping with the tool theme, in either event I will want one with lug holes.

Here's the question - can anyone tell me during what serial number run(s), the 16610 and 16613 lost their lug holes?

Thanks in advance!

It was 2002 end of Y serials into early 2003 the non lugs holes cases started to make there appearance on most all off the sports models but could be a slight overlap on the slow gold and TT sellers.

landroverking · 4 July 2013, 02:40 AM

First time I saw are Rolex without lug holes I ask my watchmaker if it was a fake. That was in 1998.

landroverking · 4 July 2013, 02:41 AM

I miss them.

Dr. Robert · 4 July 2013, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by landroverking

I miss them.

Me too

alanc · 4 July 2013, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViperB

I think early Y serial. I have a Y 16618 with lug holes. I've seen Y 16618 also without.

Quote:

Originally Posted by padi56

It was 2002 end of Y serials into early 2003 the non lugs holes cases started to make there appearance on most all off the sports models but could be a slight overlap on the slow gold and TT sellers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by landroverking

First time I saw are Rolex without lug holes I ask my watchmaker if it was a fake. That was in 1998.

Thanks to all - looks like Y serials or thereabouts are the newest examples still with lugholes.

77T · 4 July 2013, 03:28 AM

Now that you know where you stand on lug holes, I would say the 16613 would be a great choice. I've had both a black and a Bluesy - the Bluesy was so much better looking!

Knappo 1307 · 4 July 2013, 04:12 AM

I applaud you for getting lug holes... I love them...

joe100 · 4 July 2013, 04:15 AM

Lug holes are great.

HL65 · 4 July 2013, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by landroverking

I miss them.

I don't as most of my watches have them!

cop414 · 4 July 2013, 04:59 AM

Love the lug holes!

Thebiglagu · 4 July 2013, 05:25 AM

Lug holes are neat!

lja1821 · 4 July 2013, 05:33 AM

Love mine too.. S serial 16613ln

BABKA · 7 July 2013, 05:23 PM

I personally think it's a much cleaner look without them. But to each, his own :)

Armyguy03 · 7 July 2013, 06:34 PM

It adds flavor and keeps things nostalgic for me.

VICI · 7 July 2013, 09:37 PM

I'm all about evolution when it comes to watches - I like the cleaner look without lug holes.

TempoKing · 7 July 2013, 10:03 PM

I have no preference - holes or no holes.."not a question" (lol)..but from a value perspective..if you have 2 preowned
identical Y serial Steel and Gold Subs in similar condition and full set...one with holes
the other... without ?...the one... without the holes will sell for at least 500 dollars
more. Also the blue/bezel/dial will sell for more than 500 from an identical black/bezel/dial
I hope you can see how powerfull demand & preference is.. for what in my opinion is frivolous

4 July 2013, 01:57 AM	#1
alanc "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Real Name: Alan Location: Connecticut Watch: 114270 16710B Posts: 1,062	Could someone answer a question re: lug holes? I will eventually get a Sub - either a 16610 or a 16613. To me, the Sub is a tool watch so I should go for the 16610, but the 16613 is just so beautiful that I may not be able to resist it. However, in keeping with the tool theme, in either event I will want one with lug holes. Here's the question - can anyone tell me during what serial number run(s), the 16610 and 16613 lost their lug holes? Thanks in advance!

4 July 2013, 03:28 AM	#8
77T 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: PaulG Location: Georgia Posts: 42,015	Now that you know where you stand on lug holes, I would say the 16613 would be a great choice. I've had both a black and a Bluesy - the Bluesy was so much better looking! __________________ Does anyone really know what time it is?

4 July 2013, 04:15 AM	#10
joe100 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: New Mexico Watch: Explorer Posts: 12,840	Lug holes are great. __________________ It's Espresso, not Expresso. Coffee is not a train in Italy. -TRF Member 6982-

4 July 2013, 04:59 AM	#12
cop414 TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Apr 2012 Real Name: Tim Location: Pennsylvania Watch: 14060M Posts: 72,234	Love the lug holes! __________________ Rolex Submariner 14060M Omega Seamaster 2254.50 DOXA Professional 1200T Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons TRF's "After Dark" Bar & NightClub Patron P Club Member #17 2 FA ENABLED

7 July 2013, 06:34 PM	#16
Armyguy03 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: DM[V] Watch: 16710 \| 16600 Posts: 3,546	It adds flavor and keeps things nostalgic for me. __________________ Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

4 July 2013, 02:23 AM	#2
ViperB 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Sunrise,FL Posts: 6,562	I think early Y serial. I have a Y 16618 with lug holes. I've seen Y 16618 also without.

4 July 2013, 02:40 AM	#4
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	First time I saw are Rolex without lug holes I ask my watchmaker if it was a fake. That was in 1998.

4 July 2013, 02:41 AM	#5
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	I miss them.

4 July 2013, 04:12 AM	#9
Knappo 1307 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: Jason Location: USA Watch: Sea Dweller Posts: 8,561	I applaud you for getting lug holes... I love them...

4 July 2013, 05:25 AM	#13
Thebiglagu "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Real Name: Tommy Location: New jersey Watch: Rolex 16610 Posts: 457	Lug holes are neat!

4 July 2013, 05:33 AM	#14
lja1821 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2012 Real Name: Joe Location: NJ Watch: 16613ln Posts: 627	Love mine too.. S serial 16613ln

7 July 2013, 05:23 PM	#15
BABKA "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Steve Gold Location: California Posts: 294	I personally think it's a much cleaner look without them. But to each, his own :)

7 July 2013, 09:37 PM	#17
VICI "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2012 Real Name: Alex Location: Gotham City Watch: IG: Mr_Right_NYC Posts: 5,672	I'm all about evolution when it comes to watches - I like the cleaner look without lug holes.

7 July 2013, 10:03 PM	#18
TempoKing Banned Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Anastasios Location: Athens Greece Watch: Rolex GMT 1675 Posts: 8,497	I have no preference - holes or no holes.."not a question" (lol)..but from a value perspective..if you have 2 preowned identical Y serial Steel and Gold Subs in similar condition and full set...one with holes the other... without ?...the one... without the holes will sell for at least 500 dollars more. Also the blue/bezel/dial will sell for more than 500 from an identical black/bezel/dial I hope you can see how powerfull demand & preference is.. for what in my opinion is frivolous

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