ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Beef · 2 November 2014, 05:51 AM

I've noticed more and more watches being discussed on this side of the house that never would have been mentioned here a couple of years ago. It was a rare watch that popped up here with more than four digits in it's serial number. Now.....it's common. Not a bad thing, just happening sooner than I thought the advent of ceramic would herald.

So what do you guys think will be new, desirable vintage criteria?

Tritium dials?
Lug holes?
Non-engraved rehauts?

V.lats97nsx · 2 November 2014, 06:31 AM

In my book 80s is vintage.

omitohud · 2 November 2014, 06:37 AM

It's subjective. Personally I would only consider 4 digits ref to be vintage, but then again 5513 was made until the 80's. But I think for the intended purpose of this forum, anything made prior to the 90's can be discussed here.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

locutus49 · 2 November 2014, 06:40 AM

Lug holes are now considered vintage by many who own them

Next up: mechanical movements will be vintage.

Wesley Crusher · 2 November 2014, 06:41 AM

I think of any model that's two generations old as vintage.

bondtoys · 2 November 2014, 06:43 AM

I personally draw the line from plexi to sapphire

chland7 · 2 November 2014, 06:51 AM

Charm

applebook · 2 November 2014, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bondtoys

I personally draw the line from plexi to sapphire

But something unusual like the matte 168000 (? keep forgetting the reference) with sapphire would be vintage.

springer · 2 November 2014, 06:59 AM

30-years-old is a nice place to start. There are a few exceptions for me, but "30 plus" is where I'm at for vintage.

linesiders · 2 November 2014, 09:11 AM

Plexi -v- Sapphire
Lughole -v- No Lugholes
Gilt -&- Matte -v- Gloss
Applied Radium & Tritium -v- Superluminova w/surrounds
4 digits -v- more than 4

Look at it as a bit of a sliding scale - the more you have on the left the more vintage it is. So a Matt 16800 would have lugoles/trit/matte - v 5 digits/sapphire

A gilt dialed, Tudor no CG 7924 is more vintagy than a 78 Sub 5513 which is more vintagy than a 16710

themaninblack · 2 November 2014, 09:41 AM

Second hand watch dealers have a vested interest in hyping up the vintage angle. Far more romantic to describe a watch as 'vintage' than 'old' or second hand', and therefore easier to justify pricing. Some watch writers and bloggers play along with this game. A 1980's Tudor Sub is now readily described as 'vintage' and will fetch a crazy $5,000 price. It's almost the equivalent of calling a 1980's Land Rover 'vintage' and asking 10 times what it cost when new! It's not vintage, it's just an old fairly mass-produced watch. There is no scarcity, it's not rare, you can go online any day and find 50 or more of them for sale. I know one dealer who has nearly a dozen put away and he trickles them out including 2 BNIB which he will really cash in on one day. Now I like Tudors including my old one and am delighted that I can fetch a crazy price for it. I like Land Rovers too but I don't think anyone will hand over $250,000 for a "nicely worn" 1985 Defender with "plenty of patina".

Okay, I admit, watches are not exactly the same as cars, to me vintage is a personal or subjective term. I regard it as being, if not before my lifetime then at least well before I was an adult.

Baco Noir · 2 November 2014, 09:47 AM

Yeah, the blue Tudor Snowflake prices have gotten out of hand.

Plexi, tritium, matte and lug holes define vintage for me.

Sent from my iPhone and I blame autocorrect for any spellin' errs!

Tools · 2 November 2014, 10:00 AM

You shouldn't stick your head in the sand and say "this is the absolute requirements for vintage" although some still want to exclude sapphire examples. Many models will fall into the vintage category because they certainly aren't "modern".

16760's
16700's
16800's
168000's
16660's
16550's

and the list grows..

Old Expat Beast · 2 November 2014, 10:28 AM

The sapphire criterion doesn't hold water. Plenty of 1970s models out there with sapphire crystals, with five digit refs, too.

Showcall · 2 November 2014, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beef

I've noticed more and more watches being discussed on this side of the house that never would have been mentioned here a couple of years ago. It was a rare watch that popped up here with more than four digits in it's serial number. Now.....it's common. Not a bad thing, just happening sooner than I thought the advent of ceramic would herald.

So what do you guys think will be new, desirable vintage criteria?

Tritium dials?
Lug holes?
Non-engraved rehauts?

IMOP 30years old "technically" Means Vintage

Showcall · 2 November 2014, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baco Noir

Yeah, the blue Tudor Snowflake prices have gotten out of hand.

Plexi, tritium, matte and lug holes define vintage for me.

Sent from my iPhone and I blame autocorrect for any spellin' errs!

"Nipple Dials"

iclick · 2 November 2014, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bondtoys

I personally draw the line from plexi to sapphire

In reality it is a blur and we can see how many opinions we see here. For me, if I were to start a discussion of one of my 20YO Tudor big-block chronos I would place it in the vintage section of TRF. That would also satisfy the plexi and two-generation-old criteria already presented.

b5audia4 · 2 November 2014, 12:10 PM

My own criteria for "vintage" would be matte dials and no surrounds around plots.

jdmi32 · 2 November 2014, 01:00 PM

I'm in the 30+ yrs. camp.

The_Walrus · 2 November 2014, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b5audia4

My own criteria for "vintage" would be matte dials and no surrounds around plots.

I agree with this- WG surrounds signifies modern (or non-vintage) in my book

NukeMan · 2 November 2014, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdmi32

I'm in the 30+ yrs. camp.

Yup, me too. In my head vintage refers to age and not scarcity or how old-school the watch looks/operates.

joe100 · 2 November 2014, 11:17 PM

So nothing has changed since the last 15 threads on this? Lol

Beef · 3 November 2014, 12:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joe100

So nothing has changed since the last 15 threads on this? Lol

In one sense, no, Joe. But in another I'm seeing more GMTs and SeaDwellers that were produced in the last 8-10 years discussed here. There does seem to a shift. My collection ranges from a 1958 5508 to a 42mm Explorer II, so I love 'Em all. To a point. Not many of the new ceramic issues float my boat.

Tudor Fan · 3 November 2014, 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Walrus

I agree with this- WG surrounds signifies modern (or non-vintage) in my book

Agreed.

rootbeer7 · 3 November 2014, 06:15 AM

Perhaps a more apt description for some of the newer vintage models would be 'classic'. I'm thinking 80s 5513 for examples or later model 16750s?

Porsche958 · 3 November 2014, 09:54 AM

Personally I consider some WG surround dials vintage, like my 30 year old fat lady.

clock · 3 November 2014, 10:52 AM

IMO, as a general rule:
Acrylic crystal and matte or gilt dial.

Fabrice M · 27 December 2014, 04:35 AM

I just had my 1960 airkking serviced ( for the first time in over 30 years ) at Rolex Beverly hills. Anything over 20 years is considered vintage and automatically sent to Dallas which I guess is the only service center authorize to work on 20+ rolex watches.

crowncollection · 27 December 2014, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

The sapphire criterion doesn't hold water. Plenty of 1970s models out there with sapphire crystals, with five digit refs, too.

Agreed

Have a few 18000 series myself definitely vintage IMHO

landroverking · 27 December 2014, 12:04 PM

Not again plz.

2 November 2014, 05:51 AM	#1
Beef "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,824	What's The "New" Vintage Criteria? I've noticed more and more watches being discussed on this side of the house that never would have been mentioned here a couple of years ago. It was a rare watch that popped up here with more than four digits in it's serial number. Now.....it's common. Not a bad thing, just happening sooner than I thought the advent of ceramic would herald. So what do you guys think will be new, desirable vintage criteria? Tritium dials? Lug holes? Non-engraved rehauts? __________________ "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." "So you have enemies. Good. You must have stood up for something, sometime in your life." Winston Churchill

2 November 2014, 06:59 AM	#9
springer 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: jP Location: Texas Watch: GMT-MASTER Posts: 17,259	30-years-old is a nice place to start. There are a few exceptions for me, but "30 plus" is where I'm at for vintage. __________________ Member of NAWCC since 1990. INSTAGRAM USER NAME: SPRINGERJFP Visit my Instagram page to view some of the finest vintage GMTs anywhere - as well as other vintage classics.

2 November 2014, 09:11 AM	#10
linesiders 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: RedSox Nation Watch: U Talkn Bout Wilis Posts: 5,480	Plexi -v- Sapphire Lughole -v- No Lugholes Gilt -&- Matte -v- Gloss Applied Radium & Tritium -v- Superluminova w/surrounds 4 digits -v- more than 4 Look at it as a bit of a sliding scale - the more you have on the left the more vintage it is. So a Matt 16800 would have lugoles/trit/matte - v 5 digits/sapphire A gilt dialed, Tudor no CG 7924 is more vintagy than a 78 Sub 5513 which is more vintagy than a 16710 __________________ I'm a sailor peg. And I've lost my leg. Climbing up the top sails. I've lost my leg!

2 November 2014, 09:47 AM	#12
Baco Noir "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Roger Location: Colorado Watch: this ya'll Posts: 4,909	Yeah, the blue Tudor Snowflake prices have gotten out of hand. Plexi, tritium, matte and lug holes define vintage for me. Sent from my iPhone and I blame autocorrect for any spellin' errs! __________________ Current Collection: Rolex 126619LB, 116710BLNR, and 216570 polar Explorer II; Omega Apollo 8 Speedmaster and Planet Ocean 42; Tudor BB Bronze Bucherer Blue Edition; Nomos Neomatik 42; Breitling Aerospace, Avenger Blackbird, & SuperOcean 44; Doxa 300 Pro Carbon; Stowa Limette; Laco Napa Flieger; Mickey Mouse Timex Electric; and dare I say it...an Apple Watch too

2 November 2014, 10:00 AM	#13
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 SUBMARINER Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,389	You shouldn't stick your head in the sand and say "this is the absolute requirements for vintage" although some still want to exclude sapphire examples. Many models will fall into the vintage category because they certainly aren't "modern". 16760's 16700's 16800's 168000's 16660's 16550's and the list grows.. __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

2 November 2014, 06:31 AM	#2
V.lats97nsx 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Syracuse Posts: 4,025	In my book 80s is vintage.

2 November 2014, 06:37 AM	#3
omitohud "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Sam Location: los Angeles Posts: 2,051	It's subjective. Personally I would only consider 4 digits ref to be vintage, but then again 5513 was made until the 80's. But I think for the intended purpose of this forum, anything made prior to the 90's can be discussed here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2 November 2014, 06:40 AM	#4
locutus49 Banned Join Date: May 2014 Real Name: John Location: La Jolla, CA Watch: Platona Posts: 12,194	Lug holes are now considered vintage by many who own them Next up: mechanical movements will be vintage.

2 November 2014, 06:41 AM	#5
Wesley Crusher "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Real Name: Wes Location: Holosuite Posts: 6,345	I think of any model that's two generations old as vintage.

2 November 2014, 06:43 AM	#6
bondtoys "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: World Watch: 16750 Posts: 2,732	I personally draw the line from plexi to sapphire

2 November 2014, 06:51 AM	#7
chland7 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: tampa Posts: 565	Charm

2 November 2014, 09:41 AM	#11
themaninblack "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Australia Posts: 1,058	Second hand watch dealers have a vested interest in hyping up the vintage angle. Far more romantic to describe a watch as 'vintage' than 'old' or second hand', and therefore easier to justify pricing. Some watch writers and bloggers play along with this game. A 1980's Tudor Sub is now readily described as 'vintage' and will fetch a crazy $5,000 price. It's almost the equivalent of calling a 1980's Land Rover 'vintage' and asking 10 times what it cost when new! It's not vintage, it's just an old fairly mass-produced watch. There is no scarcity, it's not rare, you can go online any day and find 50 or more of them for sale. I know one dealer who has nearly a dozen put away and he trickles them out including 2 BNIB which he will really cash in on one day. Now I like Tudors including my old one and am delighted that I can fetch a crazy price for it. I like Land Rovers too but I don't think anyone will hand over $250,000 for a "nicely worn" 1985 Defender with "plenty of patina". Okay, I admit, watches are not exactly the same as cars, to me vintage is a personal or subjective term. I regard it as being, if not before my lifetime then at least well before I was an adult.

2 November 2014, 10:28 AM	#14
Old Expat Beast TRF Moderator & 2024 SUBMARINER Patron Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Adam Location: Far East Watch: SEIKO TUNA Posts: 28,623	The sapphire criterion doesn't hold water. Plenty of 1970s models out there with sapphire crystals, with five digit refs, too.

2 November 2014, 12:10 PM	#18
b5audia4 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Toronto, ON Watch: 116710BLNR Posts: 63	My own criteria for "vintage" would be matte dials and no surrounds around plots. __________________ OYSTERDATE 6694 \| SUBMARINER 16610LV \| GMT-MASTER II 116710BLNR \| DAYTONA 116520BLACK

2 November 2014, 01:00 PM	#19
jdmi32 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Real Name: Ky Location: Bay Area, CA Watch: 16570 Posts: 2,362	I'm in the 30+ yrs. camp.

2 November 2014, 11:17 PM	#22
joe100 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: New Mexico Watch: Explorer Posts: 12,834	So nothing has changed since the last 15 threads on this? Lol __________________ It's Espresso, not Expresso. Coffee is not a train in Italy. -TRF Member 6982-

3 November 2014, 06:15 AM	#25
rootbeer7 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: london Posts: 6,090	Perhaps a more apt description for some of the newer vintage models would be 'classic'. I'm thinking 80s 5513 for examples or later model 16750s?

3 November 2014, 09:54 AM	#26
Porsche958 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2013 Real Name: Joel Location: Atlanta, Ga Watch: 1655 Posts: 866	Personally I consider some WG surround dials vintage, like my 30 year old fat lady. __________________ "I couldn't find the sports car of my dreams, so I built it myself." - Ferdinand Porsche

3 November 2014, 10:52 AM	#27
clock Banned Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: in a house Posts: 13,510	IMO, as a general rule: Acrylic crystal and matte or gilt dial.

27 December 2014, 04:35 AM	#28
Fabrice M 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Denver Watch: This and that... Posts: 1,640	I just had my 1960 airkking serviced ( for the first time in over 30 years ) at Rolex Beverly hills. Anything over 20 years is considered vintage and automatically sent to Dallas which I guess is the only service center authorize to work on 20+ rolex watches.

27 December 2014, 12:04 PM	#30
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	Not again plz.

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