Inconsistent Dating Information re: 1960s Datejust 1601

[Icarus3000]

Hello all -

I inherited my father's 1601 datejust. The serial number is 2009xxx.

Out of pure curiosity I would like to know the date of manufacture, however my google searching has revealed some inconsistencies in the serial number dating tables for ~ 1966 - ~ 1969.

According to some sites (e.g. [edit it won't let me post links, but you can find it on the precisionwatches site]), the serial number would place the watch circa 1969.

According to other sites (e.g. [edit it won't let me post links, but you can find it on the beckertime site]), the watch was manufactured in 1966.

Hence my confusion...

Is there a "gold standard" site for serial number dating?

Thank you in advance!

[Tools]

Serial number dating is not an exact science, and most sites round their numbers for easier searching.

Your watch should have a stamp inside the case back that would identify the quarter and year, such as II 69, which would be my guess.

[Icarus3000]

Ah, I see. Thanks!

Not sure I want to remove the case back myself though - I think removing the bracelet is as far as I want to go without accidentally damaging anything:

:

[Dan S]

I would be quite surprised to find a 2.0M serial from 1966. That table sounds totally FUBAR. 1969 sounds more reasonable.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=54362
https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=350245

[77T]

The lookup and the table can be seen by scrolling through their website.

https://beckertime.com/lookup-rolex-serial-by-year/

Their chart actually shows 1967 - and many others comport.

But Larry said it best, have it opened if you really need to know. I’d say it’s about 55 years old. Close enough for government work…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by 77T

The lookup and the table can be seen by scrolling through their website.

https://beckertime.com/lookup-rolex-serial-by-year/

Their chart actually shows 1967 - and many others comport.

But Larry said it best, have it opened if you really need to know. I’d say it’s about 55 years old. Close enough for government work…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I recognize that dating via serial number is approximate, but IMO that Beckertime table is not even plausible in the mid-60s through early-70s. Personally, I would not use it.

[Kingface66]

Originally Posted by 77T

The lookup and the table can be seen by scrolling through their website.

https://beckertime.com/lookup-rolex-serial-by-year/

Their chart actually shows 1967 - and many others comport.

But Larry said it best, have it opened if you really need to know. I’d say it’s about 55 years old. Close enough for government work…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Beckertime chart is woefully off. Like, irresponsibly so.
This one is one of the better ones. And very similar to the one found on this forum.
Yours is most def ca. 1969

https://www.bernardwatch.com/Rolex-Serial-Numbers

[77T]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

Beckertime chart is woefully off. Like, irresponsibly so.

This one is one of the better ones. And very similar to the one found on this forum.

Yours is most def ca. 1969

Originally Posted by Dan S

I recognize that dating via serial number is approximate, but IMO that Beckertime table is not even plausible in the mid-60s through early-70s. Personally, I would not use it.

As you guys hopefully know, I was only posting the link the OP was unable to put in his initial post.

I don’t feel any confidence in that Beckertime chart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by 77T

Their chart actually shows 1967 - and many others comport. ***

But Larry said it best, have it opened if you really need to know. I’d say it’s about 55 years old. Close enough for government work…

*** edit - comport was supposed to be conflict. Didn’t notice it at the time. Darn mistyping auto-correct.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Dan S]

Originally Posted by 77T

*** edit - comport was supposed to be conflict. Didn’t notice it at the time. Darn mistyping auto-correct.

Makes much more sense now.

[Icarus3000]

Originally Posted by Kingface66

Beckertime chart is woefully off. Like, irresponsibly so.
This one is one of the better ones. And very similar to the one found on this forum.
Yours is most def ca. 1969

Ah... but according to the bernardwatch chart it's 1968 lol.

Oh well, I just wanted to know for my own curiosity really. Late 1960s is close enough for my needs. I'm just thrilled the watch looks to be in good shape and actually works! Honestly, I am shocked it's over 50 years old.

Thanks everyone for the input!

[Old Expat Beast]

Yeah, the Beckertime one is dreadful. It was also used by Bernard and Bob's up and till a few years ago, as I recall, but they apparently rectified after a lot of complaints.