Help me choose this years big buy

Posts

3,839

Likes

8,759

blubarb

·Jul 3, 2016·IG: #blubarb19

Okay, I've decided to go where angels fear to tread - yes, into the Vintage Rolex market.

I have come up with some references that turn my head aesthetically speaking. What would you recommend out of these for an almost daily wearer and in a mostly office environment?

Gilt and red subs are out of the budget from what I can tell.

Have at it as your opinion will be taken under advisement for sure 🙄🍿

(hope I've referenced correctly)

ps. None of these models are up for consideration as an immediate buy - just examples.

Edited: Jul 4, 2016

 

Posts

18,041

Likes

27,348

Foo2rama

·Jul 3, 2016·Nowhere near as grumpy as he used to be...

1655 😉 then adopt me.

In all seriousness don't go sea dweller. A nice vintage black sub is timeless, the sea dweller proportion just don't work as well. The premium seems silly to me.

Edited: Jul 4, 2016

 

Posts

1,608

Likes

8,104

calalum

·Jul 3, 2016

If that SD is a 1665, then at the very least it has a replaced dial and hands.

 

Posts

3,839

Likes

8,759

blubarb

·Jul 3, 2016·IG: #blubarb19

calalum

If that SD is a 1665, then at the very least it has a replaced dial and hands.

Found and attached a better example. Thanks.

Edited: Jul 4, 2016

 

Posts

1,199

Likes

2,095

Noles_88

·Jul 4, 2016

5513 or 5512.

 

Posts

1,161

Likes

6,810

timjohn

·Jul 4, 2016

No 1675?

The 1016 (or even better the 6610) is timeless and adaptable, but can look small on the wrist

otherwise a glossy 5513 or a matt 5512

 

Posts

1,605

Likes

6,478

Dero13

·Jul 4, 2016

NCG Sub

 

Posts

2,901

Likes

14,862

NT931

·Jul 4, 2016

blubarb

Okay, I've decided to go where angels fear to tread - yes, into the Vintage Rolex market.

I have come up with some references that turn my head aesthetically speaking. What would you recommend out of these for an almost daily wearer and in a mostly office environment?

Gilt and red subs are out of the budget from what I can tell.

Have at it as your opinion will be taken under advisement for sure 🙄🍿

(hope I've referenced correctly)

ps. None of these models are up for consideration as an immediate buy - just examples.

5513 for me. Perfect size, remarkable versatility, and a timeless look.

1016 is nice but a tad small. Good for the 2nd vintage rolex 😉

SD is rather thick, and the date spoils it for me. The objection to date also applies to the 16600.

And 5512 - a premium for extra text that subtracts from the plain beauty of the watch? No thanks!

BTW have you considered a Pepsi GMT?

 

Posts

61

Likes

34

plowjockey

·Jul 4, 2016

I am going to stick my neck out here and say wait 12 months, maybe I'll be wrong but I think vintage Rolex prices will fall.

 

Posts

5,753

Likes

2,939

Privateday7

·Jul 4, 2016

5513 or 1675

 

Posts

8,742

Likes

69,435

Darlinboy

·Jul 4, 2016·Pratts! Will I B******S!!!

Aren't those all the same watch?

Oh wait, the last one is clearly different.

 

Posts

3,839

Likes

8,759

blubarb

·Jul 4, 2016·IG: #blubarb19

plowjockey

I am going to stick my neck out here and say wait 12 months, maybe I'll be wrong but I think vintage Rolex prices will fall.

That's what I said 12 months ago 😗

 

Posts

1,152

Likes

3,052

OMGRLX

·Jul 4, 2016

I will put aside my irrational dislike for lollipop hands, and say a sub over a sea dweller.
Which sub, that's totally up to your wallet and wrist. 😉

 

A

Posts

7

Likes

0

avirdj

·Jul 4, 2016

1665

 

Posts

237

Likes

711

sydneywatchguy

·Jul 4, 2016

Side by side of a 1665 and a 1976 5513

 

Posts

319

Likes

1,401

T<25

·Jul 4, 2016

A date function may benefit office environment. 1680 or 1665 will deliver excellent service for both daily wear and office environment. The downsize is the thickness. SD in my opinion is quite thick. I am little surprised that the GMTs are not on the list.

 

Posts

3,839

Likes

8,759

blubarb

·Jul 4, 2016·IG: #blubarb19

T<25

A date function may benefit office environment. 1680 or 1665 will deliver excellent service for both daily wear and office environment. The downsize is the thickness. SD in my opinion is quite thick. I am little surprised that the GMTs are not on the list.

Have a BLNR which seems to have scratched that itch 🙄 But I do admit To liking this:

 

Posts

8,233

Likes

19,403

alam

·Jul 4, 2016

5513, may I call you Uncle?

 

Posts

2,203

Likes

2,057

al128

·Jul 4, 2016

alam

5513, may I call you Uncle?

heck. ..if you want I'll call you daddy... 😉

 

Posts

14

Likes

39

SteamedVeggie

·Jul 4, 2016

NT931

5513 for me. Perfect size, remarkable versatility, and a timeless look.

1016 is nice but a tad small. Good for the 2nd vintage rolex 😉

SD is rather thick, and the date spoils it for me. The objection to date also applies to the 16600.

And 5512 - a premium for extra text that subtracts from the plain beauty of the watch? No thanks!

BTW have you considered a Pepsi GMT?

I second that! On all counts.

The 5513 is a great watch - great size, great aesthetics, and with the added bonus of no date. Of the examples listed, it's the most beautiful and versatile. It's also the watch that pops in my mind when I see or hear Rolex.

I'm on the prowl for a 1675, even though it has a date. So that's my "plan for the future" vote.

Happy hunting!