1970s OysterQuartz

[crowncollection]

I give up trying to help here, the facts are the facts, it's not original the text is horrible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by GTS Dean

I agree that it is probably not a factory dial.

As to factory diamonds on stainless Rolexes - I bought my wife a stainless 31mm rhodium floral dial with stainless jubilee bracelet as a 25th anniversary watch. She wanted a diamond bezel and we got it, but the watch was hand-assembled to order and shipped straight from Geneva to the dealer. The dial has no diamonds, but we were told that it would be eligible for that upgrade if desired since it did have some OEM diamonds on it.

It would be interesting to know whether your wife was in fact supplied with a 178384 to replace the 178240 that it sounds like she first saw.

As the 178384 is a standard configuration with diamond bezel (the bezel being in white gold!) it would not be normal practice for Rolex to take a new, basic steel model and personalise it when they could instead just supply the correct spec watch, with correct model coding. For a start, they would be doing you a disservice, as a 178240 with a diamond bezel added later (even if genuine) would be a "hybrid" watch whose coding was inconsistent with its spec and which would almost inevitably be worth slightly less as a result.

It is conceivable that some Rolex territories would allow the "upgrade" on a secondhand watch, but to do it to a new watch would be most unusual.

The model number should be on your warranty card, or may be found between the lugs if you remove the bracelet from the twelve o'clock end of the case. What is it? 178240, 178384 or something else again?

The diamond dial would be permissable under the "precious metal" rule, as the diamond bezel of / taken from a 178384 is 18ct white gold, even though the rest of the watch is entirely in stainless steel.

Either way, it does not change the position with the OP's dial.

Thankyou,

Haywood

[modee]

Give it a rest.

You old windbag.



http://movie-sounds.org/download#L3F...5kYmFnLm1wMw==

[Haywood_Milton]

I am sorry if professional appraisal of an incorrect dial was disappointing, as most would be glad of such assistance or at least acknowledge the work of others correctly to identify what they truly have.

I am not alone in having restrained myself in the thread so far, but find your response above quite unacceptable --- and telling.

Haywood

[modee]

It wasn't in response so much to what you wrote to me but your method of arguing with everyone in this thread with an opposing point of view.


It's all right.

[Haywood_Milton]

That is baseless bluster which will not distract from the forensic and methodical argument which has inter alia proven to all but you that the first dial is incorrect.

You'd better give out popcorn if you choose to perpetuate this.

[cajunron]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

You'd better give out popcorn if you choose to perpetuate this.

[speedolex]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

You'd better give out popcorn if you choose to perpetuate this.

This is going to be better than Tom Selleck making a guest appearance on The Love Boat.

[GTS Dean]

Originally Posted by Haywood_Milton

It would be interesting to know whether your wife was in fact supplied with a 178384 to replace the 178240 that it sounds like she first saw.

As the 178384 is a standard configuration with diamond bezel (the bezel being in white gold!) it would not be normal practice for Rolex to take a new, basic steel model and personalise it when they could instead just supply the correct spec watch, with correct model coding. For a start, they would be doing you a disservice, as a 178240 with a diamond bezel added later (even if genuine) would be a "hybrid" watch whose coding was inconsistent with its spec and which would almost inevitably be worth slightly less as a result.

It is conceivable that some Rolex territories would allow the "upgrade" on a secondhand watch, but to do it to a new watch would be most unusual.

The model number should be on your warranty card, or may be found between the lugs if you remove the bracelet from the twelve o'clock end of the case. What is it? 178240, 178384 or something else again?

The diamond dial would be permissable under the "precious metal" rule, as the diamond bezel of / taken from a 178384 is 18ct white gold, even though the rest of the watch is entirely in stainless steel.

Either way, it does not change the position with the OP's dial.

Thankyou,

Haywood

Confirmed Ref. 178384 with 63160 bracelet. It was sourced from Switzerland as there were none in the US like it.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by modee

Give it a rest.

You old windbag.



http://movie-sounds.org/download#L3F...5kYmFnLm1wMw==

Infraction points issued. Any more of that and you're out.

[Haywood_Milton]

Originally Posted by GTS Dean

Confirmed Ref. 178384 with 63160 bracelet. It was sourced from Switzerland as there were none in the US like it.

Thankyou for confirming this, Dean. It is much better for you that Rolex actually followed the usual practice I described, rather than custom / retro-fitting a diamond bezel to an all steel model, and of course this is now entirely consistent with the position on precious metals / diamonds put forward by David and me in this thread. I do not consider establishing such details as argumentative and hope you understand my wish to clarify, even if others did not!

The ladies' diamond bezel models are a real winner; I like their aesthetics, they look great in my windows and they sell surprisingly well considering the premium.



Haywood