End Link Wear on 5513...Ouch!

[Cloudchaser]

This watch belonged to a guy who actually cared about it. He wore it often but carefully, and had the neurotic foresight (I mean that in the best possible way of course) to be at the vanguard of paper/box/anchor preservation.

It's the classic Rolex vintage story, really...guy becomes enamored of the Rolex brand and buys brand new nearly 50 years ago. He hears that the market has gone mad, and he wants to sell. He has everything! I can't wait to see it and then...uh...wah wah wah wah....

No serial number! Ouch, for everyone. It's not as though it were unpolished or anything, but obviously the papers and box and the rest don't mean too much at this point. It takes a fair bit of time to explain to a casual Rolex fan that the paperwork doesn't matter if there is no serial number on the watch!

I guess a great reminder to all of us to 1. ensure that you have the correct end links on a vintage watch and 2. maybe firm up your bracelet a bit (this guy wore it for nearly 50 years like Liberace's bracelets instead of a bit snugger. To each their own, I suppose, but it seems like it would exacerbate this problem (no factual basis...opinion only).

Instead of his watch being welcomed by an eager collector, his watch ends up being a parts watch (granted, nice parts, but still). Tragic watch development.

[Cloudchaser]

Model number on the other side is barely visible...

[subx]

ouch

[Wahlberg]

Originally Posted by Cloudchaser

Instead of his watch being welcomed by an eager collector, his watch ends up being a parts watch (granted, nice parts, but still). Tragic watch development.

I find it weird that because a number that is missing, it's less valuable or interesting. If it looks good, right shape, bezel, dial, ... and looks good it's meant to be worn.

[TimeLord2]

Not that you can replace the serial number but I thought the movement number is also serialized to a specific watch? Would that be part of the original paperwork?

[Yzord]

That sucks, but still, i would buy it if he has all the papers, box and a 50 year old story to tell. I would send it in for service and wait what Rolex has to say. Maybe they stamp the serial again after verification.

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by Yzord

That sucks, but still, i would buy it if he has all the papers, box and a 50 year old story to tell. I would send it in for service and wait what Rolex has to say. Maybe they stamp the serial again after verification.

Honestly didn't know that was possible. Hmmm.

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

Not that you can replace the serial number but I thought the movement number is also serialized to a specific watch? Would that be part of the original paperwork?

Not sure. I was under the impression that once the serial is gone, there was no way to confirm...

[SaliBay2019]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

Not that you can replace the serial number but I thought the movement number is also serialized to a specific watch? Would that be part of the original paperwork?

Not of the original paperwork that a buyer gets.

[SaliBay2019]

Originally Posted by Yzord

I would send it in for service and wait what Rolex has to say. Maybe they stamp the serial again after verification.

They will NEVER do that.

[SaliBay2019]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

I find it weird that because a number that is missing, it's less valuable or interesting.

I agree with the principle; but not to forget that the serial number is an important part to proof the authenticity of a watch.

[Dr.Smellody]

I've seen much worse.

[996marty]

This is what can happen to older watches I’ve got an old Tudor sub very similar to the above ok the numbers are worn but I still love the watch

[zapokee]

He got 50 years of enjoyment out of it. There's no tragedy here.

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by zapokee

He got 50 years of enjoyment out of it. There's no tragedy here.

Very true. And money afterward, too!

[whatsthetime?]

Unfortunately, either myself, my friend or Rolliworks were unable to read the serial#'s due to the end link wear on this 1970 5512. I was contacted by a TRF member very interested in buying it so I directed him to Michael at Rolliworks (who is in possession of it) and once the buyer heard the serial#'s weren't legible it was a deal breaker.

[r0lexguy]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

I find it weird that because a number that is missing, it's less valuable or interesting. If it looks good, right shape, bezel, dial, ... and looks good it's meant to be worn.

I’m with you on this... if the piece is a fine example and for the right price, wear it and enjoy it.

[r0lexguy]

Originally Posted by whatsthetime?

Unfortunately, either myself, my friend or Rolliworks were unable to read the serial#'s due to the end link wear on this 1970 5512. I was contacted by a TRF member very interested in buying it so I directed him to Michael at Rolliworks (who is in possession of it) and once the buyer heard the serial#'s weren't legible it was a deal breaker.

Funny, I was just at Rolliworks and spent some time w Michael and the team today!

[whatsthetime?]

Originally Posted by r0lexguy

Funny, I was just at Rolliworks and spent some time w Michael and the team today!

That's funny. I've spoke with Michael several times and with Sal, who I believe did the actual restoring, and Rachel. All are very pleasant indeed.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by TimeLord2

Not that you can replace the serial number but I thought the movement number is also serialized to a specific watch? Would that be part of the original paperwork?

Only on the chronometer certificate, but the 5513 wasn't chronometer rated and I'm not sure if the certificates were still included when this watch was sold in any case.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

I find it weird that because a number that is missing, it's less valuable or interesting. If it looks good, right shape, bezel, dial, ... and looks good it's meant to be worn.

Yes, definitely far less valuable without a visible serial number. Doesn’t mean it can’t be a cool-looking vintage Sub. But from a collector’s viewpoint, the watch’s valuable is now in its parts.

[Wahlberg]

Originally Posted by swish77

the watch’s valuable is now in its parts.

So imagine a 5513 MK1 bezel/dial/... whatever, perfect condition, unpolished lugs, beautiful original bezel (faded or not) whatever is most popular and a 90/100 condition after +40 years but it lost its serial number between the lugs.

I would love to see the collector taking that watch apart for parts.

[swish77]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

So imagine a 5513 MK1 bezel/dial/... whatever, perfect condition, unpolished lugs, beautiful original bezel (faded or not) whatever is most popular and a 90/100 condition after +40 years but it lost its serial number between the lugs.

I would love to see the collector taking that watch apart for parts.

Yes, a certain type of collector would still treat it as a parts watch. Others might not. However, your scenario is a little far-fetched. A watch that has had its serial and reference numbers completely worn off by the end links would usually be a watch that has had a rough life, and would probably not be the amazing condition piece you describe.

I think the main issue with not having a serial number has little to do with the actual condition of the watch. It's about originality. You can't accurately date a watch without the serial number (regardless of date stamps on case backs, which can be swapped), so you don't know if all the parts on the watch are actually original and age-correct. So, again, your scenario doesn't apply, because no matter how great the watch looks, you wouldn't know if the dial and or/insert actually belong on that case.

I ran into this serial-number issue myself on a 5512 I used to own, but because the 5512 is a chronometer, the RSC in NYC was able to provide the serial number during a service, based on the movement number. I posted about it .... more than 10 years ago. I feel old.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=124670

[r0lexguy]

Can you share more pictures?

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by swish77

Yes, a certain type of collector would still treat it as a parts watch. Others might not. However, your scenario is a little far-fetched. A watch that has had its serial and reference numbers completely worn off by the end links would usually be a watch that has had a rough life, and would probably not be the amazing condition piece you describe.

I think the main issue with not having a serial number has little to do with the actual condition of the watch. It's about originality. You can't accurately date a watch without the serial number (regardless of date stamps on case backs, which can be swapped), so you don't know if all the parts on the watch are actually original and age-correct. So, again, your scenario doesn't apply, because no matter how great the watch looks, you wouldn't know if the dial and or/insert actually belong on that case.

I ran into this serial-number issue myself on a 5512 I used to own, but because the 5512 is a chronometer, the RSC in NYC was able to provide the serial number during a service, based on the movement number. I posted about it .... more than 10 years ago. I feel old.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=124670

Remarkable similarities! Thanks for sharing the link and the original story.

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by r0lexguy

Can you share more pictures?

Sure...shortly.

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by r0lexguy

Can you share more pictures?

Here ya go...

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by Wahlberg

So imagine a 5513 MK1 bezel/dial/... whatever, perfect condition, unpolished lugs, beautiful original bezel (faded or not) whatever is most popular and a 90/100 condition after +40 years but it lost its serial number between the lugs.

I would love to see the collector taking that watch apart for parts.

I talked with Phillip Ridley about this yesterday...that to make such a watch parts just feels weird. But Phillip and the other watchmakers have client lists for parts. With parts being as valuable as they are, I guess it's a finer line between collector worthy and parts scrap than I would have guessed. I'm actually sending this watch to Phillip on Monday for further evaluation. We'll see...

Vintage is always interesting, that's for sure!

[Wahlberg]

Originally Posted by Cloudchaser

I talked with Phillip Ridley about this yesterday...that to make such a watch parts just feels weird. But Phillip and the other watchmakers have client lists for parts. With parts being as valuable as they are, I guess it's a finer line between collector worthy and parts scrap than I would have guessed. I'm actually sending this watch to Phillip on Monday for further evaluation. We'll see...

Vintage is always interesting, that's for sure!

It's so weird. I've seen subs in worse conditions and people still buy and wear those and something like this would be used as a parts watch and chopped up.I know, the condition means it still has valuable/useful items but still.

[phillip ridley]

In this situation, if sent to Rolex, Rolex then MIGHT stamp a new serial number on the inside of the caseback, but not between the lugs. Afterwards, Rolex would then update their system with the new serial.

This happened to me on a 67' GMT.