ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

fizz · 2 February 2025, 06:49 AM

Hi,

I've been offered this complete set 16520. It's a T serial (so potentially from 96) and while polished, is otherwise, in my view, in rather respectable condition (except for the slightly overpolished crown guards). The price is compelling but I have slight doubts about the period correctness of the dial. From all other variations I've seen from this era (i.e. T serial no and 1996), the dial should be a Mark 5 where the 5 lines of text are lower but this seems to feature the slightly later Mark 6 Tritium dials where the 5 lines of text are higher.

Any thoughts on this would be appreciated, along with any other aspects of the watch that might stand out.

springer · 2 February 2025, 10:09 AM

It would help if you placed photos of what you consider to be the correct dial and what range of serial numbers would be correct for this dial - and then indicate the serial number for your watch.

0nly5iv3Digits · 2 February 2025, 10:14 AM

Dial and case (sans-CG's) are impeccable on this example. CG's and bezel are over-polished for my taste... The dial is likely correct and original based on the overall condition of the piece.

Zedder · 2 February 2025, 01:30 PM

The top right lug looks thinner than the top left to me.

0nly5iv3Digits · 2 February 2025, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zedder

The top right lug looks thinner than the top left to me.

It's supposed to be that way... crown side lugs are thinner on the 5 and 6 digit references, with the exception of the new 1265XXs..

Bazil · 2 February 2025, 08:05 PM

It looks lovely to me, one watch I’d love to add …

swish77 · Yesterday, 01:37 AM

The watch is fine. There was some crossover with Mark V and Mark VI dials. Mark VI dials are seen as early as the middle of S serial Daytonas, so by Ts they were definitely already around.

Nice looking watch, although I agree about the crown guards. Depends how picky you are.

inadeje · Yesterday, 04:14 AM

I have the 99 version with solid end links and modern lume. I sold my two ceramic Daytona and kept this. If that doesn’t say it all I don’t know what will.

pigman08 · Today, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inadeje

I have the 99 version with solid end links and modern lume. I sold my two ceramic Daytona and kept this. If that doesn’t say it all I don’t know what will.

Wise decision.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2 February 2025, 06:49 AM	#1
fizz "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: UAE Posts: 388	Thoughts on this 16520 white dial Hi, I've been offered this complete set 16520. It's a T serial (so potentially from 96) and while polished, is otherwise, in my view, in rather respectable condition (except for the slightly overpolished crown guards). The price is compelling but I have slight doubts about the period correctness of the dial. From all other variations I've seen from this era (i.e. T serial no and 1996), the dial should be a Mark 5 where the 5 lines of text are lower but this seems to feature the slightly later Mark 6 Tritium dials where the 5 lines of text are higher. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated, along with any other aspects of the watch that might stand out. Attached Images __________________ https://www.instagram.com/watcheswithfizz/

2 February 2025, 10:09 AM	#2
springer 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: jP Location: Texas Watch: GMT-MASTER Posts: 17,414	It would help if you placed photos of what you consider to be the correct dial and what range of serial numbers would be correct for this dial - and then indicate the serial number for your watch. __________________ 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.

2 February 2025, 10:14 AM	#3
0nly5iv3Digits "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: EARTH Watch: What is "watch"? Posts: 1,589	Dial and case (sans-CG's) are impeccable on this example. CG's and bezel are over-polished for my taste... The dial is likely correct and original based on the overall condition of the piece. __________________ “UNpolished or I’m not interested” 😎 2FA Enabled

2 February 2025, 08:05 PM	#6
Bazil 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2022 Real Name: Bazil Brush Location: Star Gazing Watch: Any Daytona Posts: 4,135	It looks lovely to me, one watch I’d love to add … __________________ *One day, it just stops ticking, so enjoy every second* If you have no enemies, you have no character. Taking a stand always creates opposition. Paul Newman *“A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing.”*

Yesterday, 04:14 AM	#8
inadeje 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Miami Watch: me lose count. Posts: 6,006	I have the 99 version with solid end links and modern lume. I sold my two ceramic Daytona and kept this. If that doesn’t say it all I don’t know what will. __________________ ♛ 218206 Roman ♛ 116689 ♛ 126710BLRO ♛ 16520 white ♛ 16523 white ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1R-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Bronzo 671, 111 & 183, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Cartier Santos XL - Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41

2 February 2025, 01:30 PM	#4
Zedder "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2017 Location: Toronto Posts: 132	The top right lug looks thinner than the top left to me.

Yesterday, 01:37 AM	#7
swish77 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Aaron Location: CT/NYC Watch: ing the time! Posts: 7,059	The watch is fine. There was some crossover with Mark V and Mark VI dials. Mark VI dials are seen as early as the middle of S serial Daytonas, so by Ts they were definitely already around. Nice looking watch, although I agree about the crown guards. Depends how picky you are.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (2 members and 1 guests)
Mr. Xmas , kinopravda