WatchProSite|Market|Digest
WatchProSite|Market|Digest

Rolex

table

 

  Hi, I thought I found the date cross-reference in a table but I guess I'm mistaken, there was a card attached to the watch at the jewelry store which stated that the owner had originally purchased it in 1967. I simply do not know enough about Rolex to question the date, thanks for the correction and would you provide a realiable chart I can use in the future? I didn't open the watch before I bought it, I know thats taking a chance but the store didn't have an Oyster wrench and they guaranteed  a refund if it wasn't genuine, I read that Rolex sometimes marked the quarter and year when they manufactured some of the earlier cases, I'll post photos when I open it tonite.The more I look at this watch the more I like the way it looks with it's history so basically I've decided to leave it unchanged and maybe a crystal replacement when I send it in for a service. My speedmaster 105.012 was left in "as found" condition and I find it quite striking and I've really warmed to the idea of leaving it aged. As my Grandfather liked to say, " if it ain't broke...     Regards, Jim

I also found the chart/reference table Drstrong posted for Rolex bracelets, the hunt is on!

  login to reply
 
5 Comments view entire thread 

First Rolex

 
By: diamondjim : March 5th, 2011-20:43
Hi, this is my first post concerning my first Rolex, I usually reside over at the Omega forum because thats what I prefer to collect. This watch might help to change my mind, it is a ca. 1961 1.5 mil, Explorer Ref. 1016. I happen to find this in a small u...  

For a first vintage

 
By: grigo : March 5th, 2011-23:13
it looks very nice, but not being a specialist I cannot provide an opinion. Best regards, George

Really superb example, but 1,5 million serial number and 1961 don't come together.

 
By: amanico : March 5th, 2011-23:26
With a 1, 5 million serial number, you should be atound 1966 / 67, not 61. Then in 1961, I'm not sure that the T Swiss < 25 started to be installed on the Rolex watches, I would be more confient with a Swiss Dial. BUT, this is a very nice specimen, with g... 

heck of a start!

 
By: brokenwrist : March 6th, 2011-00:56
to me this is a perfect watch. really beautiful. I would keep the hands rough as they are, but that's personal preference. hunting down some nice old stock ones is part of the fun of getting these old guys. well done and wear in the best of health. kevin

table

 
By: diamondjim : March 6th, 2011-14:34
Hi, I thought I found the date cross-reference in a table but I guess I'm mistaken, there was a card attached to the watch at the jewelry store which stated that the owner had originally purchased it in 1967. I simply do not know enough about Rolex to que...