|
|
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
11 August 2014, 06:43 PM
|
#1 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: London
Posts: 18
|
Strange date on 5513 caseback: 1958?
Greetings all,
I would like anyone's thoughts on what appears to be an odd/wrong/suspicious date stamp on the inside of a supposedly 1968 5513, which I am considering purchasing. It appears to be stamped 'IV 58', whereas we all know (I think?!) 5513s started production in 1962. Clearly a look at the serial number would be helpful, which I am currently seeking, but has anyone any ideas on the face of this circumstantial evidence? I include a shot of the front of the bezel, which (as a non-expert) looks to be about right to me (meters first, white writing, matte dial). It might actually read '68' and the photo isn't sharp enough. And as an aside, if I can get this watch for around $6,000 (£3,575), should I be grabbing it? The hour marks look a little worn, as do the hands, and the pearl looks to be a replacement. Many thanks for anyone's views. John |
|
|
|
11 August 2014, 07:57 PM
|
#2 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,555
|
.
I read IV 68 |
|
|
|
|
11 August 2014, 08:16 PM
|
#3 |
|
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Real Name: Pete
Location: Base Camp
Posts: 626
|
Strange date on 5513 caseback: 1958?
Looks like a '58 stamping on the caseback. If it's a 68 than it's very poor stamping.
The serial # would help greatly. Be wary.
__________________
Take care Pete |
|
|
|
|
12 August 2014, 01:53 AM
|
#4 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: philip
Location: missouri
Watch: Rolex Submariner
Posts: 1,094
|
I think it reads IV68, but not a good stamp. Get the serial #.
From the condition I think the price is way too high. What are the letters and numbers on the bracelet? I had a 5513 that said VI66. Should be 4th qtr. (IV66) 1966. |
|
|
|
|
12 August 2014, 02:19 AM
|
#5 |
|
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Real Name: John Baker III
Location: Spring,Texas
Watch: 1971 Red Sub
Posts: 2,222
|
If the dial is correct, T< 25 then the watch cannot be 1958....
I agree that it looks like a poorly stamped "68" ..... Good luck. 
__________________
As I've grown older, I've learned that pleasing everyone is impossible, but pissing off everyone is a piece of cake. 
|
|
|
|
|
12 August 2014, 02:48 AM
|
#6 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Bryan
Location: Sac Valley, CA US
Watch: Patek 5980/1A
Posts: 2,860
|
I suspect something is not quite right. Therefore I would wait for the next one. You may reconsider if it is proven "beyond the shadow of a doubt" to be right.
When buying collectible vintage, you must be patient for the right example to show up! |
|
|
|
|
12 August 2014, 03:14 AM
|
#7 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Real Name: Richard
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Watch: TT DJ
Posts: 4,456
|
Did they ever stamp dates on casebacks?
Looks like an inspector's mark to me...
__________________
Today, I believe my jurisdiction ends here... Lug Hole Lover® |
|
|
|
|
12 August 2014, 06:42 AM
|
#8 | |
|
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Real Name: John Baker III
Location: Spring,Texas
Watch: 1971 Red Sub
Posts: 2,222
|
Quote:
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=350245
__________________
As I've grown older, I've learned that pleasing everyone is impossible, but pissing off everyone is a piece of cake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 August 2014, 07:26 AM
|
#9 | |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Real Name: Richard
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Watch: TT DJ
Posts: 4,456
|
Quote:
"1972 was the last year for case back stampings. " I'm not much for vintage so I've never run across one. Excellent info... thanks!
__________________
Today, I believe my jurisdiction ends here... Lug Hole Lover® |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
Linear Mode
