ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Daycruiser · 2 June 2016, 11:15 PM

When does a watch truly gain vintage status? Would you consider 16170 a vintage Rolex?

avilhena · 2 June 2016, 11:55 PM

No, I would not. The 16710 is a modern rolex

modee · 3 June 2016, 12:00 AM

In the trade, antique refers to 100 years older or more; vintage 50 years or more.

However, around here anything more than, say, 30 years old gets away with being called vintage and I think that's fine. And in some cases, even less. In some collector's circles of some sorts of goods, vintage may also be used to mean that it is authentic.

For example if you look on eBay there are people selling 1996 16710, and then some selling a 1989 16710 and referring to it as "vintage." Is this correct? But I think a better use of the word vintage would be to refer to a model that is at least no longer in current production.

I think that the label doesn't matter so much. Some vintage Rolexes are worth more than their modern counterparts and some are worth less.

yannis · 3 June 2016, 12:13 AM

Not a vintage but definitely it is a classic Ed. Some 16710 are approaching the age of 30 by the way. Mine is 25 with lugholes so it is not far from vintage now lol. Model was discontinued in 2006-2007 if i recall correctly.

J!m · 3 June 2016, 12:19 AM

I personally draw the line at the switch from plastic to sapphire.

theflywrist · 3 June 2016, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J!m

I personally draw the line at the switch from plastic to sapphire.

Same here.
I still find models like the 16800 for example very charming with their matte dials.
Not sure if the sapphire models, especially later variant transition to luminova will ever have the same impact current vintage has, in years to come.

Who knows though!

joli160 · 3 June 2016, 01:51 AM

No, 16710 is not vintage, it's an older watch.

Brianmac 883 · 3 June 2016, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J!m

I personally draw the line at the switch from plastic to sapphire.

Me too... plexi with 4 digit model number = vintage IMHO.

Vincent65 · 3 June 2016, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J!m

I personally draw the line at the switch from plastic to sapphire.

Maybe for subs and GMTs, but I consider my 18038 DD as vintage 5.7mil (1978)

I don't consider 16710s as vintage, though.

landroverking · 3 June 2016, 04:07 AM

No. Collectable yes.

Old Expat Beast · 3 June 2016, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianmac 883

Me too... plexi with 4 digit model number = vintage IMHO.

What about a 1970s 17000 with sapphire crystal? Thirteen years older than my plexi 5513.

Mick P · 3 June 2016, 05:29 PM

Chaps

I think the term vintage is over used.

If you base the term on plexi dials or 4 digits you are talking 30 years or thereabouts.

Do you regard Kyle Minougue as vintage ?

Regards

Mick

Qinhan · 3 June 2016, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick P

Chaps

Do you regard Kyle Minougue as vintage ?

Yes. A very fine vintage.

As to the 16710, not vintage, but a very nice watch.

Daycruiser · 4 June 2016, 05:48 PM

My 16170 was from 1996 I think, hardly vintage according to the above standards. I do love my 1675, but I swapped it with a mate for a little extra cash to finance some new purchases. In any event, I love both watches and I am looking forward to a little faded colour on the bezel of the 16170.

bde · 5 June 2016, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J!m

I personally draw the line at the switch from plastic to sapphire.

Same here. I also generally draw the line at 4 digit serial model numbers. However, models like the 16750, and 16800 are exceptions.

Tempusfugitus · 5 June 2016, 05:35 AM

I think the six figure references are "modern" Rolexes, the five figure are "classic" - a great blend of robustness, ease of service and traditional Rolex looks - and the four figure are "vintage".

The moose · 5 June 2016, 05:59 AM

I call mine 16710 "Retro"

slashd0t · 5 June 2016, 06:53 AM

My 16710 was purchased new in 2007.. I wouldn't consider that vintage.

el1125 · 5 June 2016, 01:48 PM

Not sure. A pic would help as I can only remember a certain amount of model numbers...

Vincent65 · 6 June 2016, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick P

Chaps

I think the term vintage is over used.

If you base the term on plexi dials or 4 digits you are talking 30 years or thereabouts.

Do you regard Kyle Minougue as vintage ?

Regards

Mick

I regard KM as stupefyingly successful and equally puzzlingly enduring

johnthegenerator · 6 June 2016, 03:45 AM

I (unfortunately) don't consider a 1990 300zx twin turbo to be vintage :-o

strafer_kid · 6 June 2016, 06:38 AM

Maybe not vintage yet but clearly will be in due course - great watch and definitely a keeper!

CRM114 · 6 June 2016, 09:31 AM

Personally, I don't, and agree the term is overused.

crgrbrts · 8 June 2016, 07:52 AM

How about "used"?

2 June 2016, 11:15 PM	#1
Daycruiser "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2016 Real Name: Ed Location: Hong Kong Watch: BLRO 5712 Posts: 787	New to vintage, would you consider 16710 a vintage watch? When does a watch truly gain vintage status? Would you consider 16170 a vintage Rolex?

2 June 2016, 11:55 PM	#2
avilhena "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: Brazil Posts: 1,134	No, I would not. The 16710 is a modern rolex __________________ Once you wear the crown, you can never go down.

3 June 2016, 12:13 AM	#4
yannis "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Real Name: Yannis Location: Europe Watch: maniac Posts: 9,070	Not a vintage but definitely it is a classic Ed. Some 16710 are approaching the age of 30 by the way. Mine is 25 with lugholes so it is not far from vintage now lol. Model was discontinued in 2006-2007 if i recall correctly. __________________ Rolex Submariner 116610LV \| Tudor 79220N DSSD MEMBERS - OWNERS CLUB

3 June 2016, 01:51 AM	#7
joli160 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: NL Watch: Yachtmaster Posts: 14,737	No, 16710 is not vintage, it's an older watch. __________________ Day Date 18238, Yachtmaster 16622, Deepsea 116660, Submariner 116619, SkyD 326935, DJ 178271, DJ 69158, Yachtmaster 169622, GMT 116713LN, GMT 126711.

5 June 2016, 06:53 AM	#18
slashd0t "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Real Name: Jamie Location: Edmonton, AB Watch: This & That Posts: 771	My 16710 was purchased new in 2007.. I wouldn't consider that vintage. __________________ /.

3 June 2016, 12:00 AM	#3
modee Banned Join Date: May 2016 Real Name: Modee Location: California Watch: Rolex 228206 Posts: 224	In the trade, antique refers to 100 years older or more; vintage 50 years or more. However, around here anything more than, say, 30 years old gets away with being called vintage and I think that's fine. And in some cases, even less. In some collector's circles of some sorts of goods, vintage may also be used to mean that it is authentic. For example if you look on eBay there are people selling 1996 16710, and then some selling a 1989 16710 and referring to it as "vintage." Is this correct? But I think a better use of the word vintage would be to refer to a model that is at least no longer in current production. I think that the label doesn't matter so much. Some vintage Rolexes are worth more than their modern counterparts and some are worth less.

3 June 2016, 12:19 AM	#5
J!m "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Real Name: Jim Location: Connecticut Watch: this! Hold my beer Posts: 2,839	I personally draw the line at the switch from plastic to sapphire.

3 June 2016, 04:07 AM	#10
landroverking "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Jay Location: TEXAS Watch: Daytona Posts: 7,648	No. Collectable yes.

3 June 2016, 05:29 PM	#12
Mick P Banned Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: UK / Spain Watch: 39mm Explorer Posts: 1,990	Chaps I think the term vintage is over used. If you base the term on plexi dials or 4 digits you are talking 30 years or thereabouts. Do you regard Kyle Minougue as vintage ? Regards Mick

4 June 2016, 05:48 PM	#14
Daycruiser "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2016 Real Name: Ed Location: Hong Kong Watch: BLRO 5712 Posts: 787	My 16170 was from 1996 I think, hardly vintage according to the above standards. I do love my 1675, but I swapped it with a mate for a little extra cash to finance some new purchases. In any event, I love both watches and I am looking forward to a little faded colour on the bezel of the 16170.

5 June 2016, 05:35 AM	#16
Tempusfugitus "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: UK Watch: Sub 5513 Posts: 187	I think the six figure references are "modern" Rolexes, the five figure are "classic" - a great blend of robustness, ease of service and traditional Rolex looks - and the four figure are "vintage".

5 June 2016, 05:59 AM	#17
The moose Banned Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: USA Posts: 968	I call mine 16710 "Retro"

5 June 2016, 01:48 PM	#19
el1125 Banned Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: USA Posts: 3,578	Not sure. A pic would help as I can only remember a certain amount of model numbers...

6 June 2016, 03:45 AM	#21
johnthegenerator Banned Join Date: Jun 2016 Location: Fort Collins, CO Posts: 6	I (unfortunately) don't consider a 1990 300zx twin turbo to be vintage :-o

6 June 2016, 06:38 AM	#22
strafer_kid "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Kenny Location: northern ireland Watch: SDs, Subs & GMTs Posts: 5,136	Maybe not vintage yet but clearly will be in due course - great watch and definitely a keeper!

6 June 2016, 09:31 AM	#23
CRM114 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: HK & USA Watch: GMTs,1803, 16610LV Posts: 2,001	Personally, I don't, and agree the term is overused.

8 June 2016, 07:52 AM	#24
crgrbrts "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Real Name: Craig Roberts Location: Washington, DC Watch: 1959 6564 Posts: 30	How about "used"?

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