16610lv

[jkater1]

Went to a local jeweler to look at a 2006 16610 they had, local trade in with box, papers, and original receipt that was at a pretty fair price. To my surprise he had a 16610LV, basically in similar shape, good worn condition but without box and papers though. I do not currently own any sub and have really been favoring the 16610 over the SubC. Thoughts on a 16610LV without box and papers? Thanks

[oldman2005]

Originally Posted by jkater1

Went to a local jeweler to look at a 2006 16610 they had, local trade in with box, papers, and original receipt that was at a pretty fair price. To my surprise he had a 16610LV, basically in similar shape, good worn condition but without box and papers though. I do not currently own any sub and have really been favoring the 16610 over the SubC. Thoughts on a 16610LV without box and papers? Thanks

Send it in RSC for verification, LV without tag/paper can be risky

[regaltrojan]

I agree with oldman2005 on having the prospective 16610LV verified one way or another. Is the local jeweler reputable and have you done business with them before?

[Stevec14]

Yep, assuming the seller is agreeable send it in for a service estimate. That will tell you whether it’s pukka or not. With the rising prices of the LV it’s wise to be prudent I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jason71]

At the right price, with verifiable authentic parts.........it becomes the perfect ‘wearing’ watch. Of course it can be sent to RSC for verification, but at a decent price point....I would just buy it and not worry about it.

[jkater1]

Thanks, the jeweler is reputable and says they will stand behind it with a 3 year warranty, I'm sure they would be fine sending it in for verification. He has it priced at $11,500, I was trying to get a feel for pricing and searching the classifieds I didn't come across any that didn't have box and papers, which made me think this might not be a good idea.

[jerryhum]

Originally Posted by jkater1

Thanks, the jeweler is reputable and says they will stand behind it with a 3 year warranty, I'm sure they would be fine sending it in for verification. He has it priced at $11,500, I was trying to get a feel for pricing and searching the classifieds I didn't come across any that didn't have box and papers, which made me think this might not be a good idea.

Look at watchrecon and chrono24. Most at the 11.5K and below mark are undocumented. I would say 11.5K is at the higher range of what a watch-only kermit is listing at.

[SS Oyster]

I would skip the watch only LV at that price unless it was flat four. It is very easy to get watch documented same day at RSC if you live by one, and you will have verification in writing from them via service estimate, but even still, without box / papers, I’d be leveraging that for $9.5k ish range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[exador]

Originally Posted by oldman2005

Send it in RSC for verification, LV without tag/paper can be risky

Hi, why is this? I know the insert swap is easy, but the dial and hands?

[jerryhum]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

I would skip the watch only LV at that price unless it was flat four. It is very easy to get watch documented same day at RSC if you live by one, and you will have verification in writing from them via service estimate, but even still, without box / papers, I’d be leveraging that for $9.5k ish range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would agree with this strategy. 11.5K for a undocumented LV is a bit high today but if you can get it at 9.5K, I would call it a solid buy. The rise of the LV is relatively fast and recent so most of today's dealers probably have a bit of margin, which might not be the case in the future if the trend holds.

[jkater1]

Thanks for the replies. I’m going to pass on it. I did not realize there were so many different variations. This was a mark 3 dial pointed 4, late F serial number. I think I’m going to stick with the 16610 sub, local trade in Z serial bought in 2008 with complete set @ $6700. That seems like a much better route.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[springer]

Originally Posted by exador

Hi, why is this? I know the insert swap is easy, but the dial and hands?

There is only one hand that is different on the LV, along with the maxi dial and green insert.

The LVs are easily faked with the parts available on the secondary market. Either buy a set or find one that has RSC service receipt/service card verifying the watch as an LV.

[jkater1]

Idk, was going to pass on it, went back there and this watch keeps growing on me. Been searching high and low for one now. I’m not really interested in these mint/unworn ones that are $20k plus. I’m thinking from what I’m seeing if I can get under $11k on it I’m doing good. I’m just kind of surprised how many of them out there are for sale without papers. Feel a lot more comfortable buying one locally without papers, easier to deal with if there is an issue.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[inadeje]

I’ve seem many 16610 fabricated LVs. Original Rolex but, sub converted to lv. Only rsc will be able to confirm the watch left the factory as a LV.

[mosanman]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

I would skip the watch only LV at that price unless it was flat four. It is very easy to get watch documented same day at RSC if you live by one, and you will have verification in writing from them via service estimate, but even still, without box / papers, I’d be leveraging that for $9.5k ish range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have seen the mention of a flat 4 LV a few times on this forum, what exactly does that mean? and what makes it the more desirable version?

[exador]

.

[exador]

Originally Posted by mosanman

Have seen the mention of a flat 4 LV a few times on this forum, what exactly does that mean? and what makes it the more desirable version?

See the flattened top of the 4 on the right hand watch. It’s the true 50th Anniversary model (2003) so people seem to be willing to pay more...

[gastown604]

I got mine with only the watch. Authenticated at RSC on my expense.

If you want to buy it, you should ask them to send it to RSC for authentication before buying. You can pay them for the authentication fee later if everything checks out.

[Zed82]

Originally Posted by exador

See the flattened top of the 4 on the right hand watch. It’s the true 50th Anniversary model (2003) so people seem to be willing to pay more...

All 16610LVs are true anniversary models. There were F-series made and sold in 2004 with flat four also. Would that make them not true anniversary?

[exador]

Originally Posted by Zed82

All 16610LVs are true anniversary models. There were F-series made and sold in 2004 with flat four also. Would that make them not true anniversary?

There can only be one true anniversary (1953 - 2003). But yes some 2004 models carried over the flat four bezel.

[Zed82]

Originally Posted by exador

There can only be one true anniversary (1953 - 2003). But yes some 2004 models carried over the flat four bezel.

I have never seen a document from Rolex which states that only the 2003 production of 16610LV was the true anniversary. 16610LV was the anniversary piece no matter what year it was produced. There were also F-series with flat four in 2004. Are you saying that these are not true anniversary?

[HappyFish]

The 50th anniversary of the Sub was in 2003 - not in 2004, nor in 2010! That`s all - even as all 16610 LV`s are "the anniversary model" - but this is just a collectors perspective!

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Zed82

I have never seen a document from Rolex which states that only the 2003 production of 16610LV was the true anniversary. 16610LV was the anniversary piece no matter what year it was produced. There were also F-series with flat four in 2004. Are you saying that these are not true anniversary?

Have to agree but internet hype today drives prices up to those willing to pay these crazy prices for a font.

[faimag]

pointed 4 kermits are selling over 10K without box/papers. around 12-13K for full sets. and flat 4 kermits are just insane! this makes the full set 16610 for less than 7K look like a bargain!

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by Zed82

I have never seen a document from Rolex which states that only the 2003 production of 16610LV was the true anniversary. 16610LV was the anniversary piece no matter what year it was produced. There were also F-series with flat four in 2004. Are you saying that these are not true anniversary?

I believe he is speaking mathematically.
I agree, but it still isn't worth the current inflated prices.

[HappyFish]

Rare things like a 2003 LV will always be the most valuable - even more in a "money inflated" world!

https://www.chrono24.com/rolex/subma...-id9969011.htm

[padi56]

Originally Posted by HappyFish

Rare things like a 2003 LV will always be the most valuable - even more in a "money inflated" world!

https://www.chrono24.com/rolex/subma...-id9969011.htm

It depends on your interpretation of rare would expect there are hundreds perhaps a thousand of 2003/4 LVs in this world today.

[HappyFish]

Check Chrono24- 200 16610 LV for sale with about 20 f(l)at 4 and only 5 of themes are Y/F from 2003 - thats "rare" compared to all others! But yes-all is relative!

[CPRWATCH]

Originally Posted by HappyFish

Check Chrono24- 200 16610 LV for sale with about 20 f(l)at 4 and only 5 of themes are Y/F from 2003 - thats "rare" compared to all others! But yes-all is relative!

Just checked out Chrono24 .And looks like there is a flat 4 available at $50k USD ,Which is about £39K sterling . Scary money to me & probably the highest price I've ever seen for a flat four .

[fleabag]

2003


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk