The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Brei

[Newcomer]

Hey DWW,

You are correct in that assumption, although it really, really varies based upon what "kind" of vintage Daytona you are looking at. An El Primero Daytona a la Dino's? Or are we talking Paul Newman here?

Here is some excellent reading:

http://www.hodinkee.com/features/reference-points-the-paul-newman-daytona

I am not all too familiar with your watches. But if I could give any advice to a novice, if I had $25,000 to spend, and I was new to watches, I probably would not jump straight into the vintage Daytona game. That is Lange, Patek, VC, AP money. The vintage watch game is a minefield. In fact, it is one that I am not overly comfortable in traversing, and I have been at this hobby for a few years now.

As for whether it is a good or bad idea, well, I guess it depends who you ask. I think that the stratospheric prices that people are paying for vintage Rolex is a bit astounding. Personally, I think that the market is very, very inflated. ESPECIALLY for vintage Daytonas. But then, they do not make my heart sing. The whole vintage watch thing is kind of in vogue right now, and I really do wonder whether prices will drop when people become less interested. But who knows?

I also wonder to what extent the desire for these watches emanates from group think or individual taste. Vintage Rolex has never been as desirable as it is now. Well, at least not to this extent.

Sorry for answering with a question mark, but I just think that it is a tricky, tricky area to navigate. Tread carefully!

 

[cyc wid it]

Will it be your onewatch? I dunno, I would spend $25k differently (my "nice" watch owning experience is pretty limited).

I'm down to my Datejust now... I'd probably add an AP and a JLC MUT moon phase or something with $25k.

 

[HRoi]

I also think it's a rare man who buys his first expensive watch and actually sticks with a 'onewatch' philosophy. 99% of the time, that first watch is just the starting point.

Re: box discussion, the Lange box is not all that impressive

 

[Dino944]

I know very little about watches, so please be gentle ...

I was looking at the Rolex Daytona and Submariner recently at a local shop, and am leaning towards getting a vintage Daytona. Was wondering:

1. Am I correct in thinking that most vintage Daytonas will be around $25k?
2. Is paying $25k for these kinds of movements a bad idea? Don't know much about watches, but the Daytona seems a bit expensive for the complications. I assume a lot of this is because of the hype and limited releases, but would be curious to hear from more knowledgable members about whether this would be a bad purchase.

TIA.

First there are several versions of Daytonas as they have been made since the early 1960s. I am guessing that if you are looking at $25,000 and its steel, then it is either a 6263/6265 manual wind Daytona, which are manual wind watches. Or perhaps its a 16520 automatic with Patrizzi dial,

If you want to spend less, you could buy a current automatic 116520 (new or used and they will be between maybe $9,000-13,000). These are automatics, they have a 72 hour power reserve, and are very robust. They make great watches for everyday wear.

It really depends on what you want. The 6263/6265 and 16520 are very collectible, and have gone up in value in recent years. Whether they continue to do so, only time will tell.

These were not limited release watches. In fact the 6263/6265 weren't very popular when new. Most AD's heavily discounted them just to get rid of them. However, they became more popular in the late 1980s after going out of production, and their values have increased. The 16520 was always quite popular and was Rolex's first automatic chronograph. At one point their were waiting lists of 5 years to get them and they regularly sold for more than the MSRP (sometimes by 50% more, sometimes 100% more). These are holding their values quite nicely. There are also some variations of them, with the Patrizzi dials (white subdial rings turn tan/brown), or the early porcelain dial models (produced for a year or two) where the word "Cosmograph" is separated from the other wording, and is set lower than on subsequent years). Both groups of these watches were not made in the numbers that Daytonas are produced in today, as Rolex was dependent on outside sources for base movement for the old manual wind models and for the 16520 Daytona.

I guess its a matter of whether you would chose to have a watch that is more of a collectible watch (that probably wouldn't be ideal for beating the heck out of, because you reduce its value by degrading its condition), or whether a modern 116520 Daytona which you could beat the hell out of and wouldn't have paid that much money for (relatively speaking), better suits your needs.

I don't think Daytonas are a bad purchase at all, its a matter of deciding which version best suits your needs or your collection.

 

[CTLION]

I thought I could do the one watch thing, when my wife bought me a Rolex for my 40th. 8 months later I added a Omega Speedmaster Professional and now it's hard for me to imagine wearing my Rolex.

I am kind of like a 2 year old with a shiny new toy...I love it... I love it...I love it...hey what's that over there? I want that...I want that...I love it...I love it.

 

[Dino944]

Hey DWW,

Or are we talking Paul Newman here?

As for whether it is a good or bad idea, well, I guess it depends who you ask. I think that the stratospheric prices that people are paying for vintage Rolex is a bit astounding. Personally, I think that the market is very, very inflated. ESPECIALLY for vintage Daytonas. Vintage Rolex has never been as desirable as it is now. Well, at least not to this extent.

Hi Nuke, Clearly vintage Daytonas aren't your thing, and that's cool. No watch can be everything to everyone.

I did want to point out though, that $25,000 isn't even remotely in the realm of Paul Newman Daytonas. You can't touch one in steel for less than low 6 figures, and some of the rarer models are high mid to high 6 figure range.

Pricing on a lot of vintage watches has definitely been crazy, but $25,000 has been about an average price on "NON-Newman dial" 6265/6263 for several years, so there really hasn't been any jump due to collector speculation there, and actually I've seen some in the low 30s on occasion. In addition vintage Rolex watches have been extremely desirable for more than 20 years, so I'm not sure I'd say they have never been as desirable...unless you are simply correlating the increase in prices with desirability, and to that I'd say top collectors often have a different mind set. Ralph Lauren collects watches and cars...and at times has been said to over pay, only years later to have people say he was ahead of the curve, as the item he bought are often worth many times more than he paid for them years ago. IIRC, its been said that for the right example, "He is willing to paying tomorrow's prices to be assured he has the car [watch] that he wants, today." Top collectors don't want the daily drivers/watches, they want the best examples, complete with B&P etc.

In the end, to the OP, if you are completely new to the watch hobby, and not just new to Daytonas you really need to do a lot of home work before buying.

 

[dieworkwear]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone. (Any more from others would be welcomed).

@Newcomer: I definitely don't plan on getting a Paul Newman. I think those go for $100k+. I don't have that kind of money.

Lange, Patek, VC, AP, etc all look nice, but I think they're dressier than what I'm looking for. Is there a sports watch you'd recommend?

Also, is there a particular reason why you think the vintage watch game is a minefield? I have a friend who works for Hodinkee, and I was planning to ask him for help when it came time to actually purchase something. I realize there are a lot of fake or replaced movements out there, but thought maybe it would be safe if I had some trustworthy "insiders." Bad assumption, you think?

@cyc wid it: I don't plan on making this my OneWatch. I'm not really one for "OneX" ideas anyway. I'm thinking that if I don't like this down the road, I can sell it back on the market for not too much of a loss. My main concern is that the movements seem somewhat simple for the current price of Daytonas, and I'm afraid that I'm just getting swindled by hype. I like the design and history though, I have to admit.

@dino944: Thanks for that insight. I'm indeed thinking about the 6263/6265 manual wind models.

I was actually under the impression that I could still wear the heck out of a 6263/6265. Am I wrong? I suppose it depends on what we mean by "beating the heck" out of a watch. I don't live a particularly rough lifestyle, so the most that would happen to it is maybe getting banged against a table or something when I get up. Are vintage sports watches more delicate than I thought?

(Thanks again to everyone for the help. I appreciate it).

 

[no frills]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone. (Any more from others would be welcomed).

@Newcomer : I definitely don't plan on getting a Paul Newman. I think those go for $100k+. I don't have that kind of money.

Lange, Patek, VC, AP, etc all look nice, but I think they're dressier than what I'm looking for. Is there a sports watch you'd recommend?

Also, is there a particular reason why you think the vintage watch game is a minefield? I have a friend who works for Hodinkee, and I was planning to ask him for help when it came time to actually purchase something. I realize there are a lot of fake or replaced movements out there, but thought maybe it would be safe if I had some trustworthy "insiders." Bad assumption, you think?

@cyc wid it : I don't plan on making this my OneWatch. I'm not really one for "OneX" ideas anyway. I'm thinking that if I don't like this down the road, I can sell it back on the market for not too much of a loss. My main concern is that the movements seem somewhat simple for the current price of Daytonas, and I'm afraid that I'm just getting swindled by hype. I like the design and history though, I have to admit.

@dino944 : Thanks for that insight. I'm indeed thinking about the 6263/6265 manual wind models.

I was actually under the impression that I could still wear the heck out of a 6263/6265. Am I wrong? I suppose it depends on what we mean by "beating the heck" out of a watch. I don't live a particularly rough lifestyle, so the most that would happen to it is maybe getting banged against a table or something when I get up. Are vintage sports watches more delicate than I thought?

(Thanks again to everyone for the help. I appreciate it).

You going to be at the Hodinkee/Vintage Rolex event tonight in NYC hosted by Eric Ku? Might be a nice chance to get up close and personal with some good examples.

As much as I adore examples from Rolex I must say that for my own personal tastes and small collection I've gravitated towards their modern models, although I do own a ref 1601 from 1967 that I suppose qualifies as vintage.

 

[dieworkwear]



You going to be at the Hodinkee/Vintage Rolex event tonight in NYC hosted by Eric Ku?  Might be a nice chance to get up close and personal with some good examples.

Unfortunately, I don't live in NYC. I often wish I do though. You guys get some of the best stores and events.

 

[jaypee]



You going to be at the Hodinkee/Vintage Rolex event tonight in NYC hosted by Eric Ku?  Might be a nice chance to get up close and personal with some good examples.

As much as I adore examples from Rolex I must say that for my own personal tastes and small collection I've gravitated towards their modern models, although I do own a ref 1601 from 1967 that I suppose qualifies as vintage.

Hi - do you have further details?

 

[DLJr]

Hi - do you have further details?

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-events-vintage-rolex-meetup

 

[cyc wid it]

frilly's Nautilus perhaps? Or one of the APs.

 

[DLJr]

frilly's Nautilus perhaps? Or one of the APs.

I'd go 15202 or Nautilus at that price point for sure. Though I don't get the vintage Rolex thing at all, so my opinion is biased.

 

[Dino944]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone. (Any more from others would be welcomed).

@Newcomer : I definitely don't plan on getting a Paul Newman. I think those go for $100k+. I don't have that kind of money.

Lange, Patek, VC, AP, etc all look nice, but I think they're dressier than what I'm looking for. Is there a sports watch you'd recommend?

Also, is there a particular reason why you think the vintage watch game is a minefield? I have a friend who works for Hodinkee, and I was planning to ask him for help when it came time to actually purchase something. I realize there are a lot of fake or replaced movements out there, but thought maybe it would be safe if I had some trustworthy "insiders." Bad assumption, you think?

@cyc wid it : I don't plan on making this my OneWatch. I'm not really one for "OneX" ideas anyway. I'm thinking that if I don't like this down the road, I can sell it back on the market for not too much of a loss. My main concern is that the movements seem somewhat simple for the current price of Daytonas, and I'm afraid that I'm just getting swindled by hype. I like the design and history though, I have to admit.

@dino944 : Thanks for that insight. I'm indeed thinking about the 6263/6265 manual wind models.

I was actually under the impression that I could still wear the heck out of a 6263/6265. Am I wrong? I suppose it depends on what we mean by "beating the heck" out of a watch. I don't live a particularly rough lifestyle, so the most that would happen to it is maybe getting banged against a table or something when I get up. Are vintage sports watches more delicate than I thought?

(Thanks again to everyone for the help. I appreciate it).

I think if you have a friend who really knows the ins and outs of vintage watches, then you will probably be fine. If you were a newbie, going into this alone, then you'd really have a lot of homework to do to make sure its not a fake, a redial, a "Franken-watch," etc.

As for the movement, Rolex doesn't decorate movements the way PP, AP, VC, or Lange do. They do a very basic finish, but they make robust movements. The simplicity and ruggedness makes many of their watches easy to service, although when you get into watches such as 6263/6265 you could eventually run into parts supply issues. Rolex values aren't really tied into the complexity of their movements... for example a Comex Sub has the same movement as a regular Sub of the same period, but the Comex dial and markings on the case back result in a huge price difference.

If you mostly do desk work, then a 6263/6265 would be fine for most days. However, I wouldn't wear it for any kind of extreme sports, or sports that might subject the watch to harsh adverse conditions or shocks, be it mountain climbing (banging it on hard rocks isn't going to be great for its condition or value...if you put a huge ding in the case that can't be buffed out completely), shooting subjects it to recoil and hot ejected shells from automatics, or hockey where it could get hit by a hockey stick or slammed against a wall or the ice. Vintage sports watches can be relatively rugged although I tend to think modern watches are more rugged, and more suitable for contact sports or harsh activities. On some level its a matter of what you are comfortable with, however, but I personally wouldn't subject 30-50 year old watches to particularly harsh activities that I might subject a modern, more common, less valuable, easier to replace watch to. Much like a car, sure you could try driving a nice Jaguar E-type on unpaved bumpy roads with huge pot holes, and through snow and salt, but over time those factors will take a toll on it, so I would probably choose a more ordinary modern car for those things, but YMMV.

Wishing you luck on your journey.

 

[Hayward]

Personally I think the pre- Daytona Cosmographs are the best looking versions, and their price restricts them in my mind to the advanced collector.

When most folks think Rolex, they think of the Sub. And while the Sub has become sort of a meme, the classics like the 5512, 5513, and 1680 distinguish themselves. One of these with a strap can be worn virtually anywhere with anything. They are light and discreet yet sturdy, the acrylic crystal gives it a unique look, and the bidirectional unstepped bezel is extremely useful for the sorts of things folks do more often (time elapsed, time remaining, second time zone). Drilled lugs and thick spring bars make bracelet and strap changes easy, and different straps change the character of the watch dramatically.

So yeah, vintage Rolex to me basically means the Sub. You can get a 1680 for as low as 5k and it'll only appreciate.