ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
3 August 2019, 05:04 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: California
Posts: 6
|
1530 vs. 17000
Hi Folks,
I’m relatively new here, but would love to get some opinions. I’ve already collected a 1675 and 1680 that I love, and find myself strongly attracted to the 1530/17000 steel model. I know the looks are polarizing and it’s a matter of personal taste, but I really love it! I’ll caveat my next question by saying that I generally prefer automatic watches and have no interest in starting a quartz vs. automatic debate - but what do folks think about the 1530 vs. 17000 in terms of collectibility? The production numbers on the 1530 are clearly lower than the 17000, but the Oysterquartz is also a unique odd duck in Rolex’s product catalog and also has a rare appeal. Thoughts? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
3 August 2019, 07:26 AM | #2 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,994
|
So you're talking about the Oysterquartz Date (ref. 1530) and the Oysterquartz Datejust (ref. 17000). I'd say in general, Datejust > Date. Personally, I'd hunt down a 17000 but specifically the Mk1 dials that are one of the simplest dial designs in Rolex history; only 3 lines of text. Love the overall simple dial matched with the integrated case/bracelet design.
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808) |
3 August 2019, 08:08 AM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2019
Real Name: Mike
Location: San Diego, CA
Watch: Submariner
Posts: 1,197
|
The value of production numbers pales in comparison to demand.
They are collectible amongst true fans but they are not sought after enough to command a premium or incite appreciation. You have a great collection so far and I think one of them would look great alongside either of them. |
3 August 2019, 08:13 AM | #4 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 620
|
Quote:
The 1530 is not an Oysterquartz it is a Datejust. I’ve happily got two of them both just back from Phillip Ridley! Still think the Oysterquartz is nice as well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
3 August 2019, 08:14 AM | #5 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 620
|
Sorry, meant Oyster Perpetual Date
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
3 August 2019, 08:15 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: California
Posts: 6
|
Yes, exactly, thanks for your opinion.
I’m leaning towards hunting down a 17000 but I’m having to overcome my quartz bias! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
3 August 2019, 08:17 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: California
Posts: 6
|
That’s one way to solve the dilemma, buy both! Very nice watches BTW!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
3 August 2019, 08:35 AM | #8 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Real Name: Justin
Location: Jupiter, FL
Watch: 1530,1665,1680
Posts: 2,055
|
As far as collectibility I think the 1530 is by far more collectible and “rare”. You will pay more for a nice 1530 than a nice 17000. I have owned both and kept my 1530 rather than the 17000 as I felt the 1530 would appreciate more in time.
I do think the oysterquartz will have its day, they are incredible watches for a very reasonable sum. Only issue is servicing them which is only through Rolex so expensive. With that said I have owned three and never had a problem with any of them. I would recommend both, you have dial options with the 17000 if colors appeal to you. |
4 August 2019, 12:52 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 27
|
A nice 1530 goes for between $6500-ish and $9000, while you can get a 17000 for under $3000. I love both, but the 1530 is far more collectable (and easier to service). Have a 17000 and am on constant lookout for a 1530, but the condition, price, location and timing haven’t matched for me ... yet ...
For a 17000, MK1 dial is more collectable. |
4 August 2019, 02:23 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 813
|
I would go for 1530s - beautiful watches, easy to service. Some of the dials have gorgeous cream patina. To avoid future issues, as this has not been settled yet (as far as I know), if you decide to buy a 1530, get it with a 96660 bracelet.
|
4 August 2019, 03:22 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 27
|
I second this! 96660 bracelet is important!
|
4 August 2019, 06:04 AM | #12 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: US
Posts: 145
|
I would go with the 17000.
|
4 August 2019, 10:15 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: California
Posts: 6
|
I appreciate all the opinions. Although I do love that 1530 beveled dial, I found a 17000 (all silver, box & papers) that I simply couldn’t pass up. I’ll be sure to post pics when it arrives!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
5 August 2019, 12:27 PM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Miami, USA
Watch: Rolex 1530
Posts: 8
|
You are going to love the 17000. Both the 17000 and the 1530 are great references. My 1975 1530 says hi!
|
5 August 2019, 04:45 PM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: California
Posts: 6
|
|
6 August 2019, 08:13 AM | #16 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 620
|
Just a 1530 caution re: parts
I've learned the hard way that Rolex doesn't support the 1530 anymore, so even if you wanted a service dial, they're not available.
The part most prone to need replacement is the chapter ring and sourcing a used, decent condition one can take a long time...so don't buy a banged up one thinking you can source parts as easy as it is to source an mk3 bezel for a 5513 -- money isn't the only impediment... I ended up souring a chapter ring for one of my 1530s from a great seller over at VRF from Europe... |
6 August 2019, 10:46 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Japan
Posts: 4,354
|
Both great watches. The RSC serviced my 17000 without problems a couple of years ago.
|
7 August 2019, 12:57 PM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: California
Posts: 6
|
My 17000 arrived today and it’s better than I had imagined, the case and bracelet seem almost new and it has a really satisfying heft and wrist presence despite being only 36mm.
...needless to say I’m in love! When I size the bracelet I’ll share some wrist shots. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
10 August 2019, 08:23 AM | #19 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,994
|
Ah, thank you so much, I clearly got confused. Another difference that I don't see mentioned here is the sound of the Oysterquartz (17000). I was very surprised at how "loud" the quartz movement is. The ticking sounds like you have a small drip in your sink faucet at night.
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808) |
10 August 2019, 08:23 AM | #20 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Real Name: Daniel
Location: PNW
Watch: ♛
Posts: 2,994
|
Quote:
__________________
GMT II (16710) | Explorer I (1016) | Datejust I (116234) | Submariner (1680) | Day-Date (1803) | Royal Oak (25594) | FOIS (2998 spec) | Submariner (16808) |
|
26 October 2019, 03:51 AM | #21 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 620
|
Quote:
Mods -- feel free to remove if this isn't appropriate here. Thanks |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.