“Transitional” vignette Day-Dates?

[miamiclay]

I bought this no-lume vignette dial DD last year. A few dealers, fellow collectors, etc. have offered differing opinions and theories - I’m hoping the vintage Rolex hivemind might have some answers or other examples.

AFAIK, all factory vignette DD dials are diamond-set. By far most of the vignette DDs with these older, smaller diamond settings have lumed dials, but a few of them are without lume, and that’s what I sought. (In this post, “they/them” means no-lume vignette DD dials with the smaller diamond settings.) One respected vintage dealer believed my dial was not factory (and further, that none of them are legit), other dealers and collectors believed it is correct.

I noticed that (almost?) all of them had the reference number 18238A - Not just the regular 18238 reference, and no older 18038s. Also, at the time I hunted, every one of the no-lume vignette 18238As then listed on C24 came from Japanese sellers. I thought perhaps the A-suffix ones without lume were a Japan-only offering for whatever reason.

A (very knowledgeable) fellow DD enthusiast later offered this theory - All of them seem to carry S or W serial numbers, and that time (around 1997) was when Rolex was switching from these smaller, square settings to the wider, octagonal settings. He theorized that these were painted but not lumed, in anticipation that they’d receive the new settings, but (in Rolex’s typical thrifty fashion) they ended up receiving the older, smaller settings until those were used up.

Of course, the A-suffix/Japan theory and the W-serial/transitional theory are not conflicting: Both could be true, or neither.

If you want more photos of mine, just lmk what you’d like and I’ll add them. If anyone has any examples, knowledge, or other theories (or even just baseless opinions), let’s have them!
.

.

[Animo Felonico]

Wherever the truth may lie, these vignette dials with the no-lume markers are simply stunning.