How valuable is this vintage Rolex?

[hambik]

It is the inheritance from my grandfather and I have no idea about it's value. Please help me. Any information about this watch would be helpful.

[adam78]

You have there an incredibly beautiful ref. 3131 18K bubbleback, with mint enamel printed dial. The "fab. suisse" and "swiss made" on the dial indicates, I believe, that it was made for the French market. Absence of coronet on the dial and the case serial number are both consistent with a (late) 1930s production. The fixed wire lugs are unusual and probably commensurate with the early production.

As to value, it is very hard to say. Although there is not a large demand for these, there are collectors who desire nice pieces. Condition and originality are key, and the case composition is also a factor. My guess is that it is probably worth between $5000-8000 (USD). If you decide to keep it you will have a winner of an heirloom.

Servicing these can be tricky, and not all watchmakers like to work on them. They need regular maintenance if you do decide to wear it.

[ar.parask13]

As Adam said this is a very beautiful family heirloom.. I would wear with pride!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Qinhan]

I love the dial. I'd keep it and wear it on special occasions and family get togethers if I were you.

[hambik]

Thank you so much for respond guys. As far as I understand the serial number of this watch 94618 corresponds to 1954. Am I right?

[Dries]

Looks very nice!

[watchlovr]

1936, you added a digit.
https://www.bobswatches.com/rolex-serial-numbers

Originally Posted by hambik

Thank you so much for respond guys. As far as I understand the serial number of this watch 94618 corresponds to 1954. Am I right?

[Vincent65]

Gorgeous - love it!

[hambik]

Originally Posted by watchlovr

1936, you added a digit.
https://www.bobswatches.com/rolex-serial-numbers

And what means 44985 ?

[Mark020]

Serial number

[watchlovr]

Sorry, I took the number you quoted, which I now see from the rotor inside the watch, which would date it to 1936, I don't think that is correct.

I think what you have is:
Case number 44985
Model number 3131
Number on rotor 94618

The case number should date the watch to 1933/34
I assume the number on the rotor is to do with timing and might have had a timing certificate originally?

Please someone clear this up?

You have 3 numbers

Originally Posted by hambik

And what means 44985 ?

[crowncollection]

A very beautiful piece enjoy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GLADIATOR]

Originally Posted by watchlovr

Sorry, I took the number you quoted, which I now see from the rotor inside the watch, which would date it to 1936, I don't think that is correct.

I think what you have is:
Case number 44985
Model number 3131
Number on rotor 94618

This is correct.
I never saw any official Rolex case number dating, and Rolex ONLY patented the self-winding watch in 1933 with first shipments Q1 1934, and that used the famous "didactic" movement - which yours is not.

We need to use the movement number which dates yours to 1939/1940
(71224 = 1939
99775 = 1940)
That makes perfect sense with that 2nd (or 3rd - need to check) generation movement.

Fantastic piece
Adam H

[adam78]

I think just as interesting is how the OP's grandfather came to own this particular watch...

[GLADIATOR]

Just to add - rotor is marked "SUPER BALANCE" - that was not patented till 1935 to replace "PRIMA" models.
Again supporting a serial number of 1939/40
Adam H

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by GLADIATOR

This is correct.
I never saw any official Rolex case number dating, and Rolex ONLY patented the self-winding watch in 1933 with first shipments Q1 1934, and that used the famous "didactic" movement - which yours is not.

We need to use the movement number which dates yours to 1939/1940
(71224 = 1939
99775 = 1940)
That makes perfect sense with that 2nd (or 3rd - need to check) generation movement.

Fantastic piece
Adam H

Where do you get the movement number dating list from? That would be the first I've ever heard of such a list.

[GLADIATOR]

I used a couple of sources, here is one

https://www.minus4plus6.com/numbers.php#serial

My other one has same dates.

A

[crowncollection]

Originally Posted by GLADIATOR

I used a couple of sources, here is one



https://www.minus4plus6.com/numbers.php#serial



My other one has same dates.



A

Hi where do you see movement numbers referenced to years that would be a great resource


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GLADIATOR]

Originally Posted by crowncollection

Hi where do you see movement numbers referenced to years that would be a great resource


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi maybe I jumped the gun, and put 2 + 2 together and made 5!.
I took the movement number as the serial number, and that date ties up to the movement model, Super Balance.

I will do a bit further to research if this is a 2nd or 3rd generation movement - its surely not a first from Q4 1933 or 1934.
Super Balance is 1935.

That "serial" number of 1939/40 would make sense based on the movement

Regards
adam

[harry in montreal]

It really is one of the most beautiful watches I have ever seen on this website. I'm not a bubble back guy, but it's just a beautiful watch.

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by GLADIATOR

Hi maybe I jumped the gun, and put 2 + 2 together and made 5!.
I took the movement number as the serial number, and that date ties up to the movement model, Super Balance.

I will do a bit further to research if this is a 2nd or 3rd generation movement - its surely not a first from Q4 1933 or 1934.
Super Balance is 1935.

That "serial" number of 1939/40 would make sense based on the movement

Regards
adam

I think that there are many issues dating watches from this period...and I have seen ( and mind you a lot of original pieces and they can't all be altered) that have moments far too late for certain serial ranges. I have a sneaking suspicion and since it's not super important because no one cares about anything but submariners anyway anymore, that there was aNOTher serial reset in or around 1940. Possibly at 100k. It's theory but I have my reasons. I've handled, owned...and or serviced 100's of these watches. Many things just don't add up.

That being left behind...also I think you are going to have a situation where lots of cases were made....but not used over YEARS...because they weren't selling 1,000,000 watches a year then....

They are likely to never tell so it's kind of hunt and peck.

I had never heard of any movement serial lists and I've been a bubble back early oyster guy for 30 years and I was wondering how I could have missed it.

There are movement subtleties beyond "generation" that indicate time frame.

Super Balance comes in an early single arm style...and a the later split arm style. The cap jewel assembly on the upper escape wheel being the early single screw setting from the bottom of the bridge or the later more common 2 screw setting on top of the bridge. Crown wheel screws...you name it...rotor weight style...rotor cover style...placement of number on the rotor weight or frame...rotor frame cut out for reverse serial number on the mani plate...Chronometer on the weight or not....in all different eras...

I'd love to see that watch with the rotor off. It's a pristine example of a 30's watch. That's pretty much all we need to know. Being gold the hallmarks could tell a lot. Having solid spring bars assayed would be an indicator to me of British Empire. Fab Suisse was used on watches for export in that time in certain instances. I've seen Fab En Suisse on retailer watches in Rangoon for example.

Very interesting and desirable piece. Gold bubble backs are some what rare...18k VERY rare and in that untouched condition...miraculous.

[R.W.T.]

Oh and let's not forget the UBER rare "scientific" seconds hand.

[R.W.T.]

The list I use for early watches was provided by Lance Thomas in L.A. in the 80's.

It shows 44k to be right in 1935 making sense with the super balance issues.

Now the rest of that list is fairly Inaccurate but for early stuff I find it works out pretty well.

[brandrea]

Very nice

There's absolutely no way to value such an heirloom. I'd never part with it.

[R.W.T.]

The chronometer certs are very dicey as well. We know for instance...that the movements are or were recently tested sans automatic mechanism and hand wound during testing.

I have my father's original cert with his 3065 that lists ON the cert BOTH the auto rotor serial and the 4 digit movement serial and the case number...even though...the testing facility probably shouldn't have seen anything but the 4 digit number on the base movement. Also it is odd that the number on the rotor frame (where the auto rotor number is located during this era) is actually ONE DIGIT off from the one that is on the cert meaning likely that when it got to the final assembly, it got the wrong rotor LOL. You can't make this stuff up folks.

I had another watch made within 1 year of that one....with a cert that ONLY showed the auto rotor serial number and case number and NO where was the 4 digit base movement number to be found.

The interesting thing is...my dad's watch was a later serial numbered case...with an earlier certificate date than the other watch.

Nothing makes ANY sense with Rolex during those years....one simply cannot draw ANY hard fast conclusions or absolutes. Trends possibly...

[R.W.T.]

Then you often on these flat back models.... the extra 4 digit number that is COMPLETELY irrelevant to anything that we know of. It's not the reference number, it does not correspond to the serial number of the watch or movement or rotor...it is just...some number that they stamped on the outside of the case for giggles it seems. THEY know..but we'll never know likely.

My 18k 3372 for instance has 1655 stamped above the 55k serial on the back. ????????

[77T]

Is it possible that this watch is actually a Ref. 3131?
Perhaps 1939-1940 model?

Just a sample pic of a 3131 from the Interwatches site.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1466467310.391965.jpg

[adam78]

Of course it's a ref. 3131. It's marked on the pristine outer case back (and has central seconds).

[R.W.T.]

Originally Posted by adam78

Of course it's a ref. 3131. It's marked on the pristine outer case back (and has central seconds).

[GLADIATOR]

OK, we know its a model 3131, that was made in both the 30s and the 40s

However on studying the movement we can see its NOT a model 1 or 2 or 3.

The model 5 was the first model to be chronometer AND movement was now serial numbered, that started circa 1942

The model 4 circa 1938 looks exactly like OPs but is not serialized numbered.

Therefore, in my opinion, this watch is between 1938-1942

It surely is not 1933 - 1936/7 - as neither those movement models fits.

For certain its an outstanding piece

Adam
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Best of Times - Dowling & Hess