ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

polarinda · 10 October 2012, 06:35 PM

hi,

got a chance to buy either one.

one is circa 1997
one is circa 2000

one tritium dial, the other SLuminova

cost about the same, b/p for both.

Go for the SL? or ...

mikkolopez · 10 October 2012, 06:50 PM

Given the choice I would go for the Tritium dial as it is more rare than the SL dial.

Anyways the age difference is 3 years so the movement and watch age are roughly same but the T-dial is cut out to be a collector dial.

I had the same dilemma with an Explorer 2, I went with the T-dial below because the Tritium patina is starting to show. If you are into patina-ed (vintaged) lume then a T-dial is for you.

mikkolopez · 10 October 2012, 06:52 PM

Oh sorry here is the pic

polarinda · 10 October 2012, 06:58 PM

Cool!

padi56 · 10 October 2012, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polarinda

hi,

got a chance to buy either one.

one is circa 1997
one is circa 2000

one tritium dial, the other SLuminova

cost about the same, b/p for both.

Go for the SL? or ...

Myself would buy on condition its very doubtful if any modern day SD will become hugely collectible.The SD like most of the modern Rolex range have not changed a lot since introduction of the 3 series movements in 1988.Yes they changed the lume from Tritium to Luminover around 1998 so in years wise there will be as many Tritium as Luminover .And apart from a non lug hole cases, a few minor fonts over the years.plus the different case serials they are all basically the same.But its possible in perhaps 20-30 years time because some Tritium dials get a patina these could be the more collectible out of the two. Its swings and roundabouts and a 2000 watch will be Luminover if it has just Swiss bottom of dial.

Pete17 · 10 October 2012, 07:52 PM

Neither SD is close to being rare.

Get the one YOU like.
Main differences will be that one has lug holes and next to zero luminosity and the other will have clean lugs and glow nicely.

Purely personal taste.

Good luck with your decision, either way you can't go wrong.

Sent from my Droid.

xjeeunitx · 10 October 2012, 10:10 PM

SL for me.

Jake B · 10 October 2012, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete17

Main differences will be that one has lug holes and next to zero luminosity and the other will have clean lugs and glow nicely.

Sent from my Droid.

Both will have lug holes...

polarinda · 10 October 2012, 10:19 PM

both have lug holes.

Im leaning towards the T as there's a chance the markers would go darker or something. Im not into lume, so nothing to look forward to with the SL.

Maybe the notion that a T dial is more collectable is a myth, ,since so many of them were produced.

Jake B · 10 October 2012, 10:23 PM

I was just faced with the same decision, and you can see my choice in my post about my new P series. As PADI said, neither one is more rare than the other really, and with the choices narrowed down to being between a Trit dial example from around 1997, and a SL dial one from 2000, I went for slightly newer SL model, since the only real difference was that the 2000 one was a bit newer, had a dial that still glows, and isn't unnecessarily containing radioactive paint that doesn't glow anymore.

polarinda · 10 October 2012, 10:28 PM

good choice you made. No right or wrong answers i guess.

I once saw a 1995 SD with tritium that were cracking on the hands. Not totally fallen off but hanging in there.

what a sight!

Frogman4me · 11 October 2012, 12:31 AM

For me Tritium all day.

Len · 11 October 2012, 02:29 AM

I went for an T-dial. I like the patina it will have over time. Mine is the last T dial series (U - series).

mike · 11 October 2012, 02:31 AM

Trav,

I have to agree with padi. Condition would be the key for me. As to the dial circa 2000 might be luminova as opposed to superluminova. Luminosity might not be all that great.

Given that and condition being equal tritium might be the better choice down the road, but again as padi said how much is open for debate.

springbar · 11 October 2012, 02:37 AM

I'm surprised amidst this talk of production numbers and collectibility nobody has mentioned _function_.

By now, any late-'90s tritium dial is no more than half as bright as it was when new and they're getting dimmer every day. I would get the Luminova dial if you want to use the watch in the dark in the future.

Jake B · 11 October 2012, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by springbar

I'm surprised amidst this talk of production numbers and collectibility nobody has mentioned _function_.

By now, any late-'90s tritium dial is no more than half as bright as it was when new and they're getting dimmer every day. I would get the Luminova dial if you want to use the watch in the dark in the future.

Exactly.

There's a small space, where SL dials were used with lug holes, and that's where I found my happy place, and, they are actually, probably, the most rare of the modern SD...I looked at hundreds of SD over the past year before settling on mine.

polarinda · 12 October 2012, 11:28 AM

Bought the t dial U series.b/p..serviced..

Pics tonight..

10 October 2012, 06:35 PM	#1
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,316	SD- T-dial or Luminova? hi, got a chance to buy either one. one is circa 1997 one is circa 2000 one tritium dial, the other SLuminova cost about the same, b/p for both. Go for the SL? or ...

10 October 2012, 06:52 PM	#3
mikkolopez "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Philippines Posts: 2,301	Oh sorry here is the pic __________________ At my age now ... I have SEEN everything, I have HEARD everything, I have even DONE everything, I just don't REMEMBER everything.

10 October 2012, 07:52 PM	#6
Pete17 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Real Name: Pete Location: Base Camp Posts: 627	Neither SD is close to being rare. Get the one YOU like. Main differences will be that one has lug holes and next to zero luminosity and the other will have clean lugs and glow nicely. Purely personal taste. Good luck with your decision, either way you can't go wrong. Sent from my Droid. __________________ Take care Pete

10 October 2012, 10:23 PM	#10
Jake B "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Hong Kong Watch: Gold Sub 116618LN Posts: 2,820	I was just faced with the same decision, and you can see my choice in my post about my new P series. As PADI said, neither one is more rare than the other really, and with the choices narrowed down to being between a Trit dial example from around 1997, and a SL dial one from 2000, I went for slightly newer SL model, since the only real difference was that the 2000 one was a bit newer, had a dial that still glows, and isn't unnecessarily containing radioactive paint that doesn't glow anymore. __________________ Things are more like they are now than they ever were before.

11 October 2012, 02:37 AM	#15
springbar "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Bay Area, Ca Watch: 116400GV Posts: 834	Get the Luminova I'm surprised amidst this talk of production numbers and collectibility nobody has mentioned _function_. By now, any late-'90s tritium dial is no more than half as bright as it was when new and they're getting dimmer every day. I would get the Luminova dial if you want to use the watch in the dark in the future.

10 October 2012, 06:50 PM	#2
mikkolopez "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Philippines Posts: 2,301	Given the choice I would go for the Tritium dial as it is more rare than the SL dial. Anyways the age difference is 3 years so the movement and watch age are roughly same but the T-dial is cut out to be a collector dial. I had the same dilemma with an Explorer 2, I went with the T-dial below because the Tritium patina is starting to show. If you are into patina-ed (vintaged) lume then a T-dial is for you.

10 October 2012, 06:58 PM	#4
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,316	Cool!

10 October 2012, 10:10 PM	#7
xjeeunitx 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 5,462	SL for me.

10 October 2012, 10:19 PM	#9
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,316	both have lug holes. Im leaning towards the T as there's a chance the markers would go darker or something. Im not into lume, so nothing to look forward to with the SL. Maybe the notion that a T dial is more collectable is a myth, ,since so many of them were produced.

10 October 2012, 10:28 PM	#11
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,316	good choice you made. No right or wrong answers i guess. I once saw a 1995 SD with tritium that were cracking on the hands. Not totally fallen off but hanging in there. what a sight!

11 October 2012, 12:31 AM	#12
Frogman4me Banned Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Maryland Posts: 6,268	For me Tritium all day.

11 October 2012, 02:29 AM	#13
Len "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Real Name: Hans Henrik Location: EU, Denmark Posts: 184	I went for an T-dial. I like the patina it will have over time. Mine is the last T dial series (U - series).

11 October 2012, 02:31 AM	#14
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	Trav, I have to agree with padi. Condition would be the key for me. As to the dial circa 2000 might be luminova as opposed to superluminova. Luminosity might not be all that great. Given that and condition being equal tritium might be the better choice down the road, but again as padi said how much is open for debate.

12 October 2012, 11:28 AM	#17
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,316	Bought the t dial U series.b/p..serviced.. Pics tonight..

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