Daytona 16520 A vs U serial

[Dan S]

Sorry to resurrect this discussion, but I was thinking back on it today when looking at a 214270 Explorer Mk1. Remember when the new 39mm version was released with the short hands and missing lume on the applied numerals? And everyone hated it.

Yes, that variant only lasted a year or two, so it falls into the same category as the "rare" variations being discussed in the thread. Somehow I doubt it will ever bring a premium.

[fizz]

Raising this thread instead of creating a new to ask - is it acceptable for A serial 16520 to also come with T Swiss Made T aka Tritium dials?

I've found a few of examples on the Tropicalwatch site, but about 95% of A serials seems Luminova so just want to make sure nothing is "off" if you see one with TSMT dials and Tritium.

Here are the 3 in question:

https://tropicalwatch.com/watches/xfcj
https://tropicalwatch.com/watches/phq6
https://tropicalwatch.com/watches/m7bm

[PVR]

There is no A serial Zenith 16520 that should have a T Swiss T dial. You can post 20 links to A serials with Tritium dials and all 20 would be incorrect. "A" serial Zeniths are ALL Luminova. Jacek is a lovely guy but the dials in every one of those watches has been replaced.

[springer]

Originally Posted by MrGoat

I was under the impression A serials were Swiss only dials. The only year it was luminova instead of “super luminova”.


Sent from my Apple privacy invasion product

I have seen the A serial numbers on various models marked both SWISS or SWISS MADE and have owned several A serial models with either designation.

[fizz]

Originally Posted by PVR

There is no A serial Zenith 16520 that should have a T Swiss T dial. You can post 20 links to A serials with Tritium dials and all 20 would be incorrect. "A" serial Zeniths are ALL Luminova. Jacek is a lovely guy but the dials in every one of those watches has been replaced.

Interesting to know, because I have come across a first owner 16520 with A serial marked T Swiss Made T. It has only been serviced by Rolex without the dial being changed.

Even if, for whatever reason, the dial was changed, wouldn't a service dial be a later dial (aka Lumninova) rather than TSMT? I don't understand why someone would swap it out and not put a correct dial, instead of an incorrect one.

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by fizz

I don't understand why someone would swap it out and not put a correct dial, instead of an incorrect one.

Umm, because that was the dial they wanted to install?

I read this kind of speculation all the time, but authentication really needs to be based on facts and observations, not the hypothetical motivations of people who made changes.

[Deppe]

Originally Posted by fizz

Interesting to know, because I have come across a first owner 16520 with A serial marked T Swiss Made T. It has only been serviced by Rolex without the dial being changed.

Even if, for whatever reason, the dial was changed, wouldn't a service dial be a later dial (aka Lumninova) rather than TSMT? I don't understand why someone would swap it out and not put a correct dial, instead of an incorrect one.

I also think that you have to take into account that the 90’s was a different time. In this day and age, we discuss whether the white hangtag is or isn’t important, while in the 90’s, you did not have Internet forums and stuff like that to inform/poison (depending on perspective) people’s minds, and at the same time the policies of what was allowed by Rolex was much more relaxed. I have a W-serial 16520 with a Mk1 bezel (so the 200 uph bezel). I imagine that the watch have been serviced at some point, and that the watchmaker carrying out the service (it is also my impression that a lot more non-Rolex watchmakers had a parts-account) just used a bezel that was in stock. It may be the same with the dials.

[fizz]

Since I raised the question here, I've found other credible sellers who've offered A series 16520's with dials marked T Swiss Made T. Rather than list them all here and have each one of them debunked as being dial replacements/swaps (possible, but highly speculative) I think it's worth considering that in the cusp of moving between U (where these dials are last found) and A (where they conventionally aren't) there are no absolutes (unless of course, Rolex says so, which they haven't and are unlikely to, unless an "authorized" Daytona book is published ala the recent Submariner one).

I've also learned via other wonderful threads on this site of the concept of "Tritinova" dials aka dials (specifically in the U serial range) that were marked T Swiss Made T but in fact had Luminova. Combining this observed phenomena with the findings of A serials also having the same text, it is possible that Tritinova (and not Tritium, as I had earlier suggested) might be valid for a very narrow range of A serials as well.

The person I am speaking too (not a forum dweller but a bonafide collector) is highly certain he's only taken the watch that he purchased himself in 1999 to be serviced only once to the AD in 2021 and that the dial has always been this way since he bought it. The only thing I am trying to confirm is whether it is Luminova or not.

[PVR]

I'll try and address some of your questions..

"Even if, for whatever reason, the dial was changed, wouldn't a service dial be a later dial (aka Lumninova) rather than TSMT?"

In the mid 90's before luminova dials were even produced, if you brought your watch in for a replacement "service" dial, they wouldn't have had a luminova service dial, so a service dial couldn't have been luminova. Service dials were both Tritium and luminova, it just depends on when it was swapped.

"I don't understand why someone would swap it out and not put a correct dial, instead of an incorrect one."

They may not know what is correct or not. They may want white to swap out their black or vice versa. They may have just found a seller with any dial and they just swapped it for a dozen reasons.

U is universally known as the transitional period where they moved from Tritium to Luminova. If you can accept that as fact, then how could a brand new serial (A Serial) then revert back to Tritium dials? If they had left over dials then they would have certainly been used in the U range. I stand behind A serials being only Luminova and I dont care what anyone shows me or tells me, I have handed hundreds of them. I can even quote you what the movement serial ranges should be on every serial letter (R-P), so I can tell you (with good certainty) if a movement in a particular 16520 is correct for the serial.

"the concept of "Tritinova" dials aka dials (specifically in the U serial range) that were marked T Swiss Made T but in fact had Luminova."

This is true and may explain your T Swiss T dials on A serials. Yes, there are in fact T Swiss T dials that do not have tritium markers. This was a dial that transitioned between the tritium and luminova dials. So, while an A serial "may" have a T Swiss T dial claimed as original, I would like to see a UV shot of these dials to see if they are truly Tritium or Tritinova. I would accept a T Swiss T tritinova dial as possible in very early A serial ranges, Like A1-A2, but not a true tritium dial as they were long used up by the end of U production.

As is everything in Vintage Rolex, Nothing is certain and everyone has an opinion.

[PVR]

I just went and looked at all of the links in your previous post to Jaceks watches. It just so happens all three are A1 and A2 serials, so maybe we have all just figured something out. Maybe these Tritinova dials are correct not only on some U serials but also early A's.

I still stand behind any A serial having a Tritium Dial (tritium markers not tritinova) so perhaps this is the explanation.