ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Ted Shred · 29 January 2013, 07:30 AM

Hi. Does this certificate make sense? The No., according to most of my googling, puts the watch at about '54 but the certificate is 1966, although I gather there's some weirdness in Rolex serial numbers in the early 60s. Comments anyone?

Vlad · 29 January 2013, 08:54 AM

1024 should have cal 1560. Thus cannot be 1954. The watch is from 1963 or so. The date on the certificate is the date of the sale.

crowncollection · 29 January 2013, 09:41 AM

i think Vlad''s explanation is spot on

Rickster · 29 January 2013, 10:03 AM

Right on Vlad

pdoukas · 29 January 2013, 10:17 AM

The serial puts it around 1964 so a sale date of 1966 would be acceptable. Vlad is spot on about the movement

Ted Shred · 29 January 2013, 11:08 AM

Thanks for the replies!

Here's another couple pics

Not the clearest photos, but I can make out a "1560" in the top one. Kinda strange though, shouldn't the number on the backpiece be 1024 and not 1025?

Ted Shred · 29 January 2013, 01:36 PM

Okay, maybe it's just my noobosity, but I couldn't seem to edit my post. Anyways, I googled around a bit and it seems that it's not uncommon for a 1024 to have "1025" stamped on the case back.

29 January 2013, 07:30 AM	#1
Ted Shred "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Real Name: Kevin Location: Canada Watch: Rolex/ Ω Posts: 656	confusing certificate Hi. Does this certificate make sense? The No., according to most of my googling, puts the watch at about '54 but the certificate is 1966, although I gather there's some weirdness in Rolex serial numbers in the early 60s. Comments anyone?

29 January 2013, 09:41 AM	#3
crowncollection "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: David Location: australia Posts: 20,166	i think Vlad''s explanation is spot on __________________ watches many

29 January 2013, 08:54 AM	#2
Vlad "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 813	1024 should have cal 1560. Thus cannot be 1954. The watch is from 1963 or so. The date on the certificate is the date of the sale.

29 January 2013, 10:03 AM	#4
Rickster "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Rick Location: London, Ont. Posts: 666	Right on Vlad

29 January 2013, 10:17 AM	#5
pdoukas "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Pete Location: Arizona Watch: ing Duke bball Posts: 1,488	The serial puts it around 1964 so a sale date of 1966 would be acceptable. Vlad is spot on about the movement

29 January 2013, 11:08 AM	#6
Ted Shred "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Real Name: Kevin Location: Canada Watch: Rolex/ Ω Posts: 656	Thanks for the replies! Here's another couple pics Not the clearest photos, but I can make out a "1560" in the top one. Kinda strange though, shouldn't the number on the backpiece be 1024 and not 1025?

29 January 2013, 01:36 PM	#7
Ted Shred "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Real Name: Kevin Location: Canada Watch: Rolex/ Ω Posts: 656	Okay, maybe it's just my noobosity, but I couldn't seem to edit my post. Anyways, I googled around a bit and it seems that it's not uncommon for a 1024 to have "1025" stamped on the case back.

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