ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
26 January 2017, 11:47 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Singapore
Watch: 1665 Great White
Posts: 52
|
Red Sub Question
Was offered a red sub mark 4.
Serial number 2.25M, caseback 70. From what I understand, 2.25M should have a meters first dial? Comments pls |
27 January 2017, 12:18 AM | #2 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Aaron
Location: CT/NYC
Watch: ing the time!
Posts: 6,985
|
Close to the move to feet-first dials, which you can definitely see at 2.4 mil. numbers. Not sure anyone knows 100 precent when the serial numbers get that close. It's a cross-over period. Can you post photos?
|
27 January 2017, 12:29 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Singapore
Watch: 1665 Great White
Posts: 52
|
Here they are.
|
27 January 2017, 12:19 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Real Name: Per
Location: Sweden
Watch: Gilt Rolex
Posts: 2,946
|
It's def a watch which would always be questioned. Even if correct most people would expect a meters first dial at that serial.
|
27 January 2017, 02:23 AM | #5 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Florida
Posts: 16,713
|
Welcome to the Forum!
If it sings to you and at the right price...buy and enjoy! |
27 January 2017, 02:53 AM | #6 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: jP
Location: Texas
Watch: GMT-MASTER
Posts: 17,308
|
X2. The only thing I would add is that the serial number of the watch indicates it is well within range for a meters first dial. Good luck.
__________________
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. |
27 January 2017, 08:41 AM | #7 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Aaron
Location: CT/NYC
Watch: ing the time!
Posts: 6,985
|
For what it's worth, there are confirmed 2.3 mil. feet-first dials over on the dial archive on VRF. But I agree with the above, that it would most likely always be a question mark about whether the dial was original to the case.
|
27 January 2017, 09:30 AM | #8 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Singapore
Watch: 1665 Great White
Posts: 52
|
Yup, I've seen 2.3M feet first but not 2.2M.
Quote:
|
|
27 January 2017, 09:29 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Singapore
Watch: 1665 Great White
Posts: 52
|
It does sing to me quite a bit and comes at a very reasonable price.
Question mark over the fact that the dial and serial number do not coincide. I'm not going to buy one that will be hard to let go when I wanna upgrade next time. Hence posting this hoping experts could help. |
27 January 2017, 08:47 AM | #10 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: usa
Posts: 541
|
never ever seen a 2.25M feet first red sub anywhere ... so it's highly unlikely it was born that way... I would pass.
|
27 January 2017, 08:52 AM | #11 |
Liar & Ratbag
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Renato
Location: NYC / Miami Beach
Watch: Rolex Daytona
Posts: 5,344
|
As I continue my search for my birth year red sub, similar to the OP's search, I appreciate this thread.
It's questions and answers like this that make this forum awesome! |
27 January 2017, 10:44 AM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 21
|
I have a 2.21M Mark IV feet first Red that my father in law bought new.
|
27 January 2017, 03:35 PM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Singapore
Watch: 1665 Great White
Posts: 52
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.