Which era is your favourite?

Posts

431

Likes

1,492

OmeGez

·Apr 19, 2020

With lockdown still seeming a long process, I thought a light discussion that everyone can participate in would be good, also making for easy reading.

With that in mind, my question is;

Which era of Rolex is your favourite?

I’m still an amateur in collecting, so just take these as my personal views, nothing more.

For me, it has to be

Years 2000>2003’ish
Post tritium>
Super-luminova
<Pre-ceramic
<No Rehaut markings.

Reasons?

I believe, to me, this is the sweet spot in the Rolex era as a daily wearing watch, with classic style oyster case, bracelet and no rehaut markings. Ideally with lug holes.

super-luminova which won’t patina (bad thing to some people) and the legible dial/glow.

Exending the years another 5-6 years to 2010’ish;
2000-2010 - they’re probably the most accessible and readily available to purchase and parts/servicing not commanding eye watering figures.

Obviously id lust for a vintage 5512 Sub or similar- but I wouldn’t feel comfortable wearing that as a daily, so I feel I wouldn’t get the enjoyment out of something like that.

Again, some might scratch their heads at my reasons - so please feel free to correct me and enlighten me with your reasons.

G.

 

Posts

1,325

Likes

1,870

Sherbie

·Apr 19, 2020

Obviously there is no right or wrong answer here - we are all individuals and have (thankfully) very different tastes.

but you post has me slightly confused - are you really selecting that era (2000-3) on design preference or on your personal budget?

Dont get me wrong, i also like 5 digits references a lot (and have 3 of them - 1984 GMT Master 16750, 1993 GMT Master 16700 and a 2002 Exp 2 polar 16570), but pretty sure most lust for for a pristine pussy galor, a no crown sub, pumpkin Exp 1 1016 etc etc too, if we could afford them

 

Posts

431

Likes

1,492

OmeGez

·Apr 19, 2020

Yes - that’s what it boils down to for me, I feel that era is the best bang for buck for wearing a ‘vintage/classic’ style Rolex as a daily.

it’s the best design/era for my budget that I feel comfortable picking some scars up with.

I’d pick a 5 digit ‘classic’ over a brand new ceramic (at RRP price) for example.

Just curiosity got me starting a discussion if someone else on here got a call from an AD would they pick the brand new 6 digit as their daily wearer, over a 5 digit at the same price.
(New/reliability vs older/servicing?) Just trying to see what others opinions are of what they’d choose as a ‘tool/daily’ - not based on collecting and kept in a box.

If that makes sense? I guess my question did need more explanation.

 

Posts

24,257

Likes

54,023

Dan S

·Apr 19, 2020

Mid 60s through early 80s domed-acrylic-crystal tritium-dials (gilt-gloss or matte) without white gold surrounds. That was the golden age as far as I'm concerned, and you can still find many examples that have held up really well. I like to look at the 1950s radium-dials on IG, but if I'm honest with myself, the typical condition of those dials and bezels just doesn't really give me as much joy. Flat sapphire crystals and white-gold surround dials don't do it for me.

Edited: Apr 19, 2020

 

Posts

431

Likes

1,492

OmeGez

·Apr 19, 2020

This is the kind of replies/discussion I enjoy 😀

thanks for the reply,

And out of curiosity- would you wear a 60’s-80’s vintage as a daily at present?

 

Posts

1,487

Likes

2,376

asrnj77

·Apr 21, 2020

OmeGez

With lockdown still seeming a long process, I thought a light discussion that everyone can participate in would be good, also making for easy reading.

With that in mind, my question is;

Which era of Rolex is your favourite?

I’m still an amateur in collecting, so just take these as my personal views, nothing more.

For me, it has to be

Years 2000>2003’ish
Post tritium>
Super-luminova
<Pre-ceramic
<No Rehaut markings.

Reasons?

I believe, to me, this is the sweet spot in the Rolex era as a daily wearing watch, with classic style oyster case, bracelet and no rehaut markings. Ideally with lug holes.

super-luminova which won’t patina (bad thing to some people) and the legible dial/glow.

Exending the years another 5-6 years to 2010’ish;
2000-2010 - they’re probably the most accessible and readily available to purchase and parts/servicing not commanding eye watering figures.

Obviously id lust for a vintage 5512 Sub or similar- but I wouldn’t feel comfortable wearing that as a daily, so I feel I wouldn’t get the enjoyment out of something like that.

Again, some might scratch their heads at my reasons - so please feel free to correct me and enlighten me with your reasons.

G.

Good Choice. My 5 digit Sea Dweller with lug holes agrees. But, if I could afford it I think I’d be all over the early 1970’s with acrylic crystals and tritium lume. I’d love a mint 1655 (who wouldn’t?)

 

Posts

431

Likes

1,492

OmeGez

·Apr 21, 2020

That Sea-Dweller is so nice!

Agreed..! This is why I believe my specified choices are the best (for me) for affordability for a DAILY wearing Rolex. As you’ve mentioned, in an ideal world I’d be looking for a 60’s no date sub etc etc etc, but I couldn’t justify wearing it as a daily either.

I wear my 16570 most days with enjoyment and no worries about scratching it and it still gives me the enjoyment of wearing a close to ‘classic’ style.

 

Posts

6,872

Likes

12,626

SpeedyPhill

·Apr 21, 2020

July 1975 to April 1981... as a thematic "collector" this was a period in which there were no US spaceflight missions...
In that period the Soviet-Russians launched 21 space missions, wristwatch-wise extremely interesting with the use of the Omega Alaska II project by the Soyuz 25 & 26 crews on their way to the Salyut-6 space station, and a series of "Interkosmos" missions with guest cosmonauts from the Warsaw Pact nations, wearing watches like the Ekvar quartz and even a few Omega wristwatches... as these got behind the Iron Curtain...
.

... June 1978, Soyuz-30 Poland "Interkosmos" mission

 

K

Posts

1,443

Likes

3,810

killer67

·Apr 21, 2020

1 AD to mid 80s for me

 

Posts

2,520

Likes

17,832

airansun

·Jul 5, 2020

I missed this thread.

I vote for the sixties.

 

Posts

4,593

Likes

10,810

janice&fred

·Jul 5, 2020

50's to 60's datejusts, precisions, airkings, oysters and oysterdates along with most Tudors from the same era. I suppose if I had to stretch I would go for 70's and up acrylics.

 

Posts

17,419

Likes

164,525

Alpha

·Jul 5, 2020

For me it would be the eighties although I am slightly biased.

'L' serial

Currently in the care of 'Rolex' for some t.l.c.

 

Posts

504

Likes

1,951

RonJ

·Jul 5, 2020

I prefer the 1980s, only because that is when I bought our 3 Rolex watches (Lady's Datejust, Men's Date, and Men's GMT Master).

 

Posts

57

Likes

105

larrylush

·Jul 5, 2020

1960s-1980s. Why didn’t my parents get me one of everything when I was born in the 1980s and stash them for me. Bad parenting for sure.

 

C

Posts

553

Likes

970

CLA05

·Aug 8, 2020

Late 60’s to late 90’s 😀

 

Posts

1,430

Likes

2,957

Marsimaxam

·Aug 11, 2020

1960s... gilt dials, radium and tritium, red font, small arrow and Newman

 

Posts

5,636

Likes

5,810

SkunkPrince

·Aug 11, 2020

Anything without stick hands! HATE STICK HANDS!

 

Posts

1,382

Likes

850

watch3s

·Aug 12, 2020

The reign of the five digit era I suppose. The only non five digit rolex I own is a 114270 which technically is barely a six digit serial as it doesnt have any of the maxi case/maxi dial affliction. Kudos for SEL, and newer movement I guess. But yes, not a fan of the aesthetics the six digits have. The five digit era were the rolex watches I grew up seeing more often and actually fit properly on my wrist.

 

Posts

29,672

Likes

76,831

Archer

·Aug 12, 2020·Omega Qualified Watchmaker

Dan S

Mid 60s through early 80s domed-acrylic-crystal tritium-dials (gilt-gloss or matte) without white gold surrounds. That was the golden age as far as I'm concerned, and you can still find many examples that have held up really well. I like to look at the 1950s radium-dials on IG, but if I'm honest with myself, the typical condition of those dials and bezels just doesn't really give me as much joy. Flat sapphire crystals and white-gold surround dials don't do it for me.

Pretty much the same. Not a fan of shiny dials or gold surrounds for sure. Due to the highly reflective nature of Rolex sapphire crystals, I'll take acrylic any day...

 

Posts

199

Likes

849

Rodentman

·Aug 12, 2020

Modern era, current models as they have the latest bracelets and movements. My AD showed me a 1967 GMT. It had a bracelet that looked great but the case was scratched, the hands badly deteriorating. Cost 30k. Not for me.