Polishing - New vs Vintage

[exador]

It always amuses me how the concept of watch polishing is discussed in polar opposite terms on the two watch forums...

Rolex General Discussion
“Oh no - I scratched my watch!” is met with “Don’t worry, RSC will polish that out no probs” or “Enjoy the bumps and bruises. RSC will make it look like a new watch next service”.

Vintage Rolex Discussion
“Whatever you do, don’t take your watch to RSC. They will polish it” or “Ask your watchmaker not to touch the case”.

Now put yourselves in the shoes of those 5513 or 1675 owners back in the 60’s and 70’s...wouldn’t they have been just as keen to get scratches polished out as new watch owners are today?
Yet here we are on this endless quest to find “unpolished” examples of vintage pieces.

Perversely, we seem to have no issues with keeping Michael Young employed making vintage bracelets “look like new” again

Perhaps the whole thing can be explained by the “tool watch” to “luxury timepiece” evolution...

Thoughts?

[Grandcrew]

I’ve never had a new Rolex. I imagine it would be like a blank canvas and each tiny scratch would call attention to itself. My 1675 is closer to a Pollock, where each brush stroke(scratch) all add up to a thing of beauty. Were four digits as shiny when they were new as the six digits? I wasn’t alive to see and I’d be keen to know.

[stmoore]

I don’t polish either new or used.
I bet those in the 60s weren’t quick to tart up their watches.

[214270Explorer]

Speaking of the "tool watch" to luxury timepiece" evolution ---
This is an area of much conflict, for certain.
My 1987 Perpetual Date was comprehensively serviced in 2016 where it was returned to factory-new looking (I did have the original hands an dial left alone; I did opt to NOT have them replaced, BUT they were almost close to new-looking anyway.)
Before that, it had been only worn infrequently, and there was just a bit of scraping to the crystal and clasp.
It really had "no history" to speak of, which may actually be a shame!?
Today, with the "hopeful" oncoming purchase of the newest Explorer, I will be daily-wearing that watch and simply let it accumulate "life."
So it seems the opinions regarding the subject of the post will vary from person to person, watch to watch, and application to application.
For me -- desirability of "condition" depends on a variety of things.
exador, your question made me think more deeply about this subject. Thanks for the post!

[037]

An unpolished vintage reference means you get to enjoy it relatively close to how it was shaped when new. Think of it more along the lines of a time machine than anything. It also creates a better starting point for those who do want to have their vintage watches brushed and polished.

Scratches don't bother me one bit as long as the case and bracelet are still in good shape. I prefer unpolished whenever possible.

Regarding MY bracelet restorations, that's more to keep the original bracelet going longer. Buying a new bracelet is an option but then it's not period-correct and original to the watch. Instead it's a service replacement that likely doesn't match the original 1:1 when looking at the details. It's not always about appearance.

[exador]

Originally Posted by 214270Explorer

exador, your question made me think more deeply about this subject. Thanks for the post!

Cheers and welcome to the forums!