The first digit is the year, decade not specified. The second digit is the month, first nine months are 1 through 9, then O, N, D for October, November, December. The remaining digits are the serial number, assumed sequentially per model.

This watch first appears in the 1970 catalog, so it was manufactured in December 1970.

 

It’s a December of 1970’, literally number 1 of the production for that year and model, the OP will never get that lucky again with that variant. And as someone pointed out it will never start with “00”. Keep it because coincidentally I watched a bunch of interest on Seiko groups today about that watch.

 

I don’t know it looks pretty good. I really like those KS. That dial is perfect. I can’t say I’m 100% up on the price of these but even with the D the serial number is still 0001 or however many 0’s that was

 

Thanks!

FYI @Power90801 is a Real Life friend that lurks here. He’s getting to be quite the expert of n Seikos. His collection is stunning and makes me jealous. When this existential threat to humanity is over I’m sure he’ll attend the next SoCal GtG we have.

Hmm I wonder if he has seen the zimbi thread....

 

I'll listen to you guys and keep it

However, is 0D0001 number 1 for [The Whole 1970], or is 0D0001, number 1 for [December 1970]?

I always assumed it's #1 for [December 1970]?

Otherwise they cap themselves at only 10,000 watches every year, makes more sense that it's 120,000 watches every year instead

So there might be a 0O0001 out there?

The reason for me wanting to return it is the broken emotional connection and the misrepresentation and the faulty assumptions that came with them, being a start with 0 person, I kinda assumed January was 0, and this was the #1 for 1970

 

Anyway, whatever the case, I'm keeping it

It's a good conversation starter, I'll preserve it to the best of my ability

 

Number 1 for 45-7010

 

Read what @Power90801 said above.

it’s the first of the year and made in December. Serial numbers start at the start of the years production.

I think he explained it as being made the year before but not in that year until December.

make sense?

Your idea is actually 10k per month. Your forgetting the month in the serial.

 

I'm starting to wish that I hadn't said anything about the "D", but I suppose someone else would have mentioned it.

 

Haha, not at all, thank you, it was a good ride

The idea your friend proposed is actually 10,000 watches per year claiming that the month in the serial is just there for the information (or maybe even lifetime of the model)

While I don't know anything conclusively, basically the current claim is, as an example, there can't be watches with serials "110048" and "120048" - as one would indicate a #48 watch made on January 1971 (let's say 1971) - and #48 watch made on February 1971 - but I think both exists

So what I'm saying is, did they really produce so few watches that, 10,000/year was enough and the #cap of the serial was enough, 120,000 makes more sense and the last 4 digits only being unique for that Year+Month+Model combination

So unless there is consensus, the only thing certain is that this watch was the #1 serial in 1970/December - Ultimately, since it's either 1970/October or 1970/December for a nice serial, it's what I originally committed for without engaging my brain and senses (Thinking 0 was January and I was getting the January)

 

It’s a great looking watch - wear it and enjoy it. Enough said

 

first digit is year, 2nd digit/letter is month your left with 4 digits which as you note is 10,000. Which means they can do 10,000 a month they can also roll over the last 4 digits at any time as long as they do not break more then 10k a month.

 

The serial number is interesting and would definitely make me pay a bit more but I feel the condition of the actual watch may negate any premium. It’s definitely well worn, the gold medallion is beginning to show signs, the crystal is chipped at 3, and a few case knocks too. If it’s going to be worn then no big deal but you mentioned your purchases are 80% investment in which case I’m not sure this was a winner.

 

Honestly I regret so so so so many of my recent purchases but I don't regret this one

If money was no object, I'd 100% buy this anyway, as it's not a random watch for me, it's a watch I care about

It's not a "Grammar of Design" watch by the way, that might be the only shortcoming, so instead of being a "Japanese Tank" - it's more like a "Japanese Hovercraft"

I suspect I overpaid somewhere around $200 - the condition of the watch/dial makes it $500-ish, the buckle is $80+ - the box/papers/tag the bundle probably bumps it $100 - the rest paid for the serial

 

My initials are PP. So does that mean ...

 

It might still be the first of its kind.

 

i remember there is a seiko serial number verifier that i used to open on line before. tried to find it and
hopefully this is the same - https://retroseiko.co.uk/seiko-serial.htm

 

In the end, the only thing that really matters is the enjoyment you get from the watch.