Help with next watch purchase -116520

[marc12]

Hi all,

I am seriously considering purchasing a 116520 Daytona within the next 30 days, either dial, however I would prefer white.

My main question is there any glaring things I should watch out for when buying? Certain serial numbers, etc?
Is there a reason some are priced up past $25k and others near $13k?

Thanks for your time.

[schoolboy]

Originally Posted by marc12

Hi all,

Is there a reason some are priced up past $25k and others near $13k?

Thanks for your time.

Very good question. I want to know this answer as well.

I wonder if there are any "special" things to look for.

Like the flat 4 bezel insert on the kermit and things like that.

I wonder if things of that sort are what makes the price differences, or if it's just people selling the exact same model at different prices...

Hopefully someone will answer this!

Anyhow, very good question OP.

[faimag]

I will give it a quick go:

First series 116520 (K-Y, circa 2001-2002) had fat hour markers but maintained the skinny hour/minute hands from 16520. No rehaut engraving and shorter clasp (with coronet fully siting on the flip-lock).

F to M series (circa 2003-2008) were exactly the same but came with fat hands.

V (circa 2009) onwards came with rehaut engraving and longer clasp (with coronet partially siting on the flip-lock; easier to release).

Some of the last 116520s (random serials on 5-yr warranty, mid-2015 and 2016) came with polished inner blade on the clasp as opposed to sandblasted.

Dials can be single or double tick (i.e. if there is 1 or 2 minute lines on the right [minute 26 and 27] and left [minute 33 and 34] of the "swiss made" at 6 o'clock), but no particular pattern with serials/date. Variation seems random.

Also, there is some variation on the writing on the dial, particularly the presence or not of a larger spacing in "COSMOGR APH" vs "COSMOGRAPH" (visibly longer space in the first version). Again, variation seems random.

Finally, older 116520s had somewhat matte silver surrounds on the subdials, whereas later ones had glossy subdial surrounds. Not exactly sure when the transition occurred.

As far as I know, the font of the bezel markings has always been the same (Arial). All 4s are pointy, there are no open 6s/9s, no long 5s. Some people have suggested that there is variation in the method of engraving the tachymeter scale on the bezel (deeper carving vs laser-etched numbers). Personally I haven't noticed this difference in SS models (but there is a clear difference between new SS vs new TT/YG, the later looking less like carved and more like etched).

PS1: There is some overlap between Z-M-V regarding the rehaut (yes/no), clasp (short/long), and location of the serial number (during the transition, some with engraved rehaut still carried the serial carved on the case, between the lugs).

PS2: I don't think there is any particular thing you need to watch out for. All these differences have not yet materialized in terms of perceived value from a collector's standpoint, so there is not much bearing on the asking price as a result. Most of the difference in asking price is because of condition (NOS, mint, worn), availability of box and papers, etc. And of course, some of the sellers being nuts! US$25K?!

[schoolboy]

Thanks for sharing faimag!

Will look over this carefully when I get home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ree7]

I personally prefer the K-Y first series because it's the first Daytona generation to feature an in-house movement. Produced only for a short period of time and has the distinguishable 'thin hands' similar to the now-much-more-expensive 16520. Also I believe some white dial in this serial has turned creamy due to production defects. Attached pic I found from IG @otozoceo

[faimag]

Interestingly enough, in the above pic you can see several differences:

1) fat hands (left) vs skinny hands (right). Personally I think the fat hands match the fat hour markers better (the 16520 had skinny hands but also skinny hour markers).
2) single-tick dial (left) vs double-tick dial (right). The double tick has an additional long line at minutes 27 and 33.
3) spaced COSMOGR APH (left) vs not spaced (right).

I guess it's correct what they say: one pic = 1000 words!

[RolexComplex]

I see extra space between Oyster and Perpetual, but I don’t see the spacing difference on Cosmograph. What is it?

I also don’t see the double vs. single ticks. What am I missing. I do see the longer ticks at 27 and 33.

[ree7]

Originally Posted by RolexComplex

I see extra space between Oyster and Perpetual, but I don’t see the spacing difference on Cosmograph. What is it?

I also don’t see the double vs. single ticks. What am I missing. I do see the longer ticks at 27 and 33.

Here they are

[marc12]

Originally Posted by faimag

I will give it a quick go:

First series 116520 (K-Y, circa 2001-2002) had fat hour markers but maintained the skinny hour/minute hands from 16520. No rehaut engraving and shorter clasp (with coronet fully siting on the flip-lock).

F to M series (circa 2003-2008) were exactly the same but came with fat hands.

V (circa 2009) onwards came with rehaut engraving and longer clasp (with coronet partially siting on the flip-lock; easier to release).

Some of the last 116520s (random serials on 5-yr warranty, mid-2015 and 2016) came with polished inner blade on the clasp as opposed to sandblasted.

Dials can be single or double tick (i.e. if there is 1 or 2 minute lines on the right [minute 26 and 27] and left [minute 33 and 34] of the "swiss made" at 6 o'clock), but no particular pattern with serials/date. Variation seems random.

Also, there is some variation on the writing on the dial, particularly the presence or not of a larger spacing in "COSMOGR APH" vs "COSMOGRAPH" (visibly longer space in the first version). Again, variation seems random.

Finally, older 116520s had somewhat matte silver surrounds on the subdials, whereas later ones had glossy subdial surrounds. Not exactly sure when the transition occurred.

As far as I know, the font of the bezel markings has always been the same (Arial). All 4s are pointy, there are no open 6s/9s, no long 5s. Some people have suggested that there is variation in the method of engraving the tachymeter scale on the bezel (deeper carving vs laser-etched numbers). Personally I haven't noticed this difference in SS models (but there is a clear difference between new SS vs new TT/YG, the later looking less like carved and more like etched).

PS1: There is some overlap between Z-M-V regarding the rehaut (yes/no), clasp (short/long), and location of the serial number (during the transition, some with engraved rehaut still carried the serial carved on the case, between the lugs).

PS2: I don't think there is any particular thing you need to watch out for. All these differences have not yet materialized in terms of perceived value from a collector's standpoint, so there is not much bearing on the asking price as a result. Most of the difference in asking price is because of condition (NOS, mint, worn), availability of box and papers, etc. And of course, some of the sellers being nuts! US$25K?!

Bookmarked, thank you very much!

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by faimag

I will give it a quick go:

First series 116520 (K-Y, circa 2001-2002) had fat hour markers but maintained the skinny hour/minute hands from 16520. No rehaut engraving and shorter clasp (with coronet fully siting on the flip-lock).

F to M series (circa 2003-2008) were exactly the same but came with fat hands.

V (circa 2009) onwards came with rehaut engraving and longer clasp (with coronet partially siting on the flip-lock; easier to release).

Some of the last 116520s (random serials on 5-yr warranty, mid-2015 and 2016) came with polished inner blade on the clasp as opposed to sandblasted.

Dials can be single or double tick (i.e. if there is 1 or 2 minute lines on the right [minute 26 and 27] and left [minute 33 and 34] of the "swiss made" at 6 o'clock), but no particular pattern with serials/date. Variation seems random.

Also, there is some variation on the writing on the dial, particularly the presence or not of a larger spacing in "COSMOGR APH" vs "COSMOGRAPH" (visibly longer space in the first version). Again, variation seems random.

Finally, older 116520s had somewhat matte silver surrounds on the subdials, whereas later ones had glossy subdial surrounds. Not exactly sure when the transition occurred.

As far as I know, the font of the bezel markings has always been the same (Arial). All 4s are pointy, there are no open 6s/9s, no long 5s. Some people have suggested that there is variation in the method of engraving the tachymeter scale on the bezel (deeper carving vs laser-etched numbers). Personally I haven't noticed this difference in SS models (but there is a clear difference between new SS vs new TT/YG, the later looking less like carved and more like etched).

PS1: There is some overlap between Z-M-V regarding the rehaut (yes/no), clasp (short/long), and location of the serial number (during the transition, some with engraved rehaut still carried the serial carved on the case, between the lugs).

PS2: I don't think there is any particular thing you need to watch out for. All these differences have not yet materialized in terms of perceived value from a collector's standpoint, so there is not much bearing on the asking price as a result. Most of the difference in asking price is because of condition (NOS, mint, worn), availability of box and papers, etc. And of course, some of the sellers being nuts! US$25K?!