ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

mhoutman · 28 February 2007, 04:02 AM

Hi, I made up my mind to buy a new 14060 M. My AD in the Netherlands has one for sale with a D-serial.

Is there any difference between a 14060 with either a D or Z serial ? ( I read something that the newest ones have no holes in the case)

TIA

Michael

JJ Irani · 28 February 2007, 04:06 AM

Welcome to TRF, Michael.

The 14060M comes ONLY with lug holes....and there is absolutely no difference between the D and the current Z series.

JJ

padi56 · 28 February 2007, 04:06 AM

No difference what so ever the D one just left the Rolex factory a little earlier both with holes,welcome to TRF.

nko51 · 28 February 2007, 05:45 AM

Z started in 2006, whereas D about 2004-2005.

JJ Irani · 28 February 2007, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nko51

Z started in 2006, whereas D about 2004-2005.

D in April 2005.
Z in April 2006.

JJ

mhoutman · 28 February 2007, 06:19 AM

as a iwc collector (with one rolex oysterdate precison bought in 1981) it was a tough decision to chose between the Submariner or Seadweller. I consider the SB as the reference for all sport watches and the SD felt to big for my wrist; that is also why I don't like the current iwc bigpilot and ingenieur.

both a great brands anyway.

michael

Alex Stylianou · 28 February 2007, 05:14 PM

The perfect purchase !

slim · 28 February 2007, 05:18 PM

D and Z are the same but i would go for the Z just incase, if in the future you decided to sell it. One 2006 might be a little more appealing than a 2005 watch. Just my 2 cents.

miner · 28 February 2007, 05:22 PM

Although there is no difference apart from the serial number, you may be able to bargain on the price of the "older" D compared to the "newer" Z.

padi56 · 28 February 2007, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slim

D and Z are the same but i would go for the Z just incase, if in the future you decided to sell it. One 2006 might be a little more appealing than a 2005 watch. Just my 2 cents.

But a D date letter could be 2006 as well D April 2005 to April 2006 Z date letter May 2006 on.

slim · 28 February 2007, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by padi56

But a D date letter could be 2006 as well D April 2005 to April 2006 Z date letter May 2006 on.

You are correct Padi, people like me will assume that the Z is newer thats all.

Blue Bull · 28 February 2007, 10:39 PM

I paid $4373 for my brand new ,from AD, D Serial Sea-Dweller(Thats at todays exchange rate)At the price,do you think it matters whether its a D or Z .. ??

28 February 2007, 04:02 AM	#1
mhoutman "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 9	Sub no date 14060 M (D or Z serialnumber) Hi, I made up my mind to buy a new 14060 M. My AD in the Netherlands has one for sale with a D-serial. Is there any difference between a 14060 with either a D or Z serial ? ( I read something that the newest ones have no holes in the case) TIA Michael

28 February 2007, 04:06 AM	#2
JJ Irani Fondly Remembered Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: JJ Location: Auckland, NZ Watch: ALL SOLD!! Posts: 74,319	Welcome to TRF, Michael. The 14060M comes ONLY with lug holes....and there is absolutely no difference between the D and the current Z series. JJ __________________ Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!! I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!!

28 February 2007, 04:06 AM	#3
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 52,879	No difference what so ever the D one just left the Rolex factory a little earlier both with holes,welcome to TRF. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

28 February 2007, 05:45 AM	#4
nko51 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Alex Location: USA Watch: TT Blue Sub Posts: 2,542	Z started in 2006, whereas D about 2004-2005. __________________

28 February 2007, 06:19 AM	#6
mhoutman "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 9	as a iwc collector (with one rolex oysterdate precison bought in 1981) it was a tough decision to chose between the Submariner or Seadweller. I consider the SB as the reference for all sport watches and the SD felt to big for my wrist; that is also why I don't like the current iwc bigpilot and ingenieur. both a great brands anyway. michael

28 February 2007, 05:14 PM	#7
Alex Stylianou "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: UK Posts: 1,785	The perfect purchase !

28 February 2007, 05:18 PM	#8
slim "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: los angeles/SD Watch: RG DD,SD43,Pam104 Posts: 385	D and Z are the same but i would go for the Z just incase, if in the future you decided to sell it. One 2006 might be a little more appealing than a 2005 watch. Just my 2 cents.

28 February 2007, 05:22 PM	#9
miner "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 1,294	Although there is no difference apart from the serial number, you may be able to bargain on the price of the "older" D compared to the "newer" Z.

28 February 2007, 10:39 PM	#12
Blue Bull Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,887	I paid $4373 for my brand new ,from AD, D Serial Sea-Dweller(Thats at todays exchange rate)At the price,do you think it matters whether its a D or Z .. ??

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)