ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

bjw · 7 July 2019, 01:52 AM

I tried on my friends Sub the other day. It was purchased in 1989 and has only been serviced 2x. You will notice the lines are well on their way to getting nice and creamy. However, the hands show almost no aging. They have never been replaced and was wondering why there’s is such a contrast. I’ve seen this on other vintage Rolexes on the For Sale Forum with this contrast and just assumed the hands have been replaced. My friend assures me he has not. Any thoughts on why this would be the case? Could it be the difference in surface material in contact with the lume? Gold on the Hands v material on the face?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

7 July 2019, 01:52 AM	#1
bjw "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: USA Posts: 443	Lume on Hands I tried on my friends Sub the other day. It was purchased in 1989 and has only been serviced 2x. You will notice the lines are well on their way to getting nice and creamy. However, the hands show almost no aging. They have never been replaced and was wondering why there’s is such a contrast. I’ve seen this on other vintage Rolexes on the For Sale Forum with this contrast and just assumed the hands have been replaced. My friend assures me he has not. Any thoughts on why this would be the case? Could it be the difference in surface material in contact with the lume? Gold on the Hands v material on the face? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk __________________ 116710 BLNR 16710 COKE Tudor 7922R Tudor 79220N Tudor 79260P Panda "Opinions are like wrist watches, everyone's shows different time from the other. But all believe that theirs is accurate. "

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