ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
11 November 2004, 11:04 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
|
New vs old models.
Can anyone explain what the attraction of old models is? No, really. Take the Sea-Dweller as an example.
Why should a person prefer an original 1665 Sea-Dweller over the current 16600? Heck, the 1665 is terrible in comparison. Acrylic crystal that scratches easily; rattly bracelet; horrible slow set date (what a pain that is); non ratcheting bezel; genuine service life about to expire; etc. For those people with a DR then it's even worse - they can't even get a new replacement DR dial from Rolex - only a new white one. The 16600 is miles ahead of the 1665 in both technology and parts availability. Why would you want to spend more money on a 1665 (white or DR) than you would if you bought a 16600 new from a dealer with full warranty? |
13 November 2004, 05:04 PM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
|
Hmm. I guess that the vintage loving crowd can't come up with a single rational reason.
Last edited by Laager; 13 November 2004 at 10:05 PM.. |
15 November 2004, 03:57 AM | #3 |
TRF Founder
Join Date: Nov 2004
Real Name: Mark
Location: Florida
Watch: PAM 187 / SS LV
Posts: 719
|
I myself perfer modern technology. The new style today is unmatchable. This is not only true with watches, but cars, motorcycles and ofcourse the modern women.
However, if money was no object I'd love to have a collection of fine vintage watches. |
16 November 2004, 08:15 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
|
I can appreciate old technology and design. I just don't see the point in spending more than a new one for it.
I'd like a Milguass but not because all the crazy speculators and collectors think it's rare and 'special'. I couldn't give a toss about that malarky. I'd like one for the antimagnetic movement. My own watch regularly gets magnetised and a Milgauss wouldn't suffer the same problem. That's it. No other reason. However, there's no way known I would ever spend the ridiculous amount of money required to buy one at today's inflated prices. The things cost less than a Submariner when they were sold. Damned if I'm going to pay $20K+ for one. That's idiotic. |
2 December 2004, 02:17 PM | #5 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 220
|
Quote:
You are a sassy kitty, aren't you? It's very simple really: Not everyone is interested in the latest, greatest technology or iterations. Many people prefer things that've been around for a while, that have some class and style. Just because something is "new and improved" doesn't mean that it is automatically better in every way. Look at it this way: I own a brand new 16200 Datejust and a 32 year old 1601 Datejust. One of the things I love about Rolex is their long history in the watch world. Now with the 16200, I am wearing the culmination of that history, very nice. But with the 1601 I am wearing an actual piece of that history. To me, that is something that's nearly invaluable. NO new watch can have that, not ONE. A new watch is only one thing: A new watch. A vintage watch is many things: A part of the companies history, a part of horological history, an important link in a long line of evolution, a physical entity with lots of stories it can tell, a wonderful reminder of how things used to be, a link to our past, an actual hand-crafted watch that a human being made piece by piece, and at best it's a scrying glass that can be used to see back in time and know what things were like and, with our modern knowledge, where they were headed back in the day when people couldn't even comprehend the idea of a mechanized factory grinding their sapphire crystals and balance bridges out by the thousands per day. In fact, now that I think of it a little more carefully, it seems to me that a slavish dedication to the newest and "best" technology and models is about the shallowest pursuit an genuine afficianado of timepieces can engage in. |
|
3 December 2004, 11:20 PM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hampshire UK
Posts: 8
|
Nice to see You
Hi Micah..
Nice to see you over on this one how do you divide your time up?. Anyway good to see some friendly!! familiar posters Bruce |
4 December 2004, 03:26 AM | #7 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 220
|
Quote:
In the evenings my wife watches TV, which I personally dislike, so I relax by hitting whichever forums seem to be having the most fun. Hope this one gets interesting! |
|
2 January 2005, 09:57 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: norcal - city by the bay
Posts: 12
|
new vs old
hrrrmmmm.....i'll give you a few reasons:
1) the matte dial w/o the white gold surrounds looks WAY better than the new glossy dial (i have a 16610LV - so i am qualified to make a comparison); 2) the acrylic crystals, besides looking better, are lighter and less expensive to replace. i've never had the scratching problem that you mention; so, you must be a brute w/ watches. i haven't even mentioned the glare issue that the sapphire crystals present; 3) as molex stated, vintage watches have a great history and w/ servicing look and operate just as well as their newer counterparts. put it this i dont think any of the COMEX divers had any issues w/ their 1665s =) < shark >>>< |
15 January 2005, 09:00 PM | #9 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
You walk in the door and claim that because people don't agree with your views that there's idiocy here? Keep walking. |
|
15 January 2005, 09:29 PM | #10 | ||||||
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Laager; 17 January 2005 at 12:45 AM.. |
||||||
15 January 2005, 09:58 PM | #11 | |||||||
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, have a peek here. |
|||||||
6 April 2008, 08:01 PM | #12 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Real Name: Dave
Location: South Africa
Watch: Where you're going
Posts: 135
|
Quote:
JJ, looks like you need to get Zemina a TV? http://rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=37188
__________________
Dave. |
|
6 April 2008, 08:15 PM | #13 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex
Posts: 18,421
|
Because...
Because the 1665 is vintage collection, already discountinued for a long time. And it's really hard to find one. And they look MORE beautiful than the new model.
|
6 April 2008, 08:19 PM | #14 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mililani, Oahu
Posts: 1,307
|
Quote:
|
|
6 April 2008, 08:32 PM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mililani, Oahu
Posts: 1,307
|
It's all subjective ain't it. Vintage collectors are intrinsically motivated to like vintage models. The reasons can be many or few. What's wrong with that? I'm sure that vintage collectors also have modern models too. Nobody's living in the 18th Century. It's a hobby.
No one needs to collect vintage Rolex, cars, stamps, guns, coins. But people just do. I'd say enthusiast, evangelists make the world a much more interesting place. Don't rain on someone's parade just because they have different interests. It's not like collecting vintage watches are illegal or immoral. |
6 April 2008, 08:48 PM | #16 | |
"TRF" Life Patron
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 52,229
|
Quote:
__________________
ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder |
|
6 April 2008, 09:32 PM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 429
|
I like the old and the new ones. Padi, the 1665 didn't have the SEL or ratcheting bezel which were introduced on the 16660.
|
6 April 2008, 09:39 PM | #18 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2008
Real Name: Michael
Location: LaLa Land
Watch: Sub Date 16610
Posts: 1,757
|
Wow... massive bump on this thread! I love the classic models.... I think you really have to know your classic/vintage watches not to get caught out.... It is easy for us newbies to buy a model off the shelf..... One day though...?? :-)
|
6 April 2008, 10:32 PM | #19 |
Facilitator
Join Date: Nov 2005
Real Name: Steve
Location: Omnipresent
Posts: 33,226
|
This thread is 3.5 years old.
I agree with Peter and when you look at a watch like this, what is not to like:
__________________
Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds to be. ~Abraham Lincoln Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride. ~John F. Kennedy ROLEXploitation - yeah I'm a victim |
6 April 2008, 10:38 PM | #20 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Real Name: Steve
Location: Queensland, AUST
Posts: 2,003
|
Quote:
Cheers Steve |
|
6 April 2008, 10:47 PM | #21 | ||
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Petros
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 370
|
Quote:
In one word: VINTAGE!!! Because of the same reason I'd prefer a type-rating on a wonderful Boeing 707 over anything that has LCDs & puters in its cockpit!!! Yes, the 707 had rudder tabs that used aerodynamic forces for assistance, thus requiring to put muscles to work up front (read=the acrylic crystal scratches easily, slow setting date... for example), but you know what? You could land that bird safely with 1/3 of its wing panel missing if you just had the right skills... the bird would allow you to really FLY it!!!!!!! Try that with FBW (fly-by-wire)... Quote:
the 707 was and still is a (pilot's) aircraft!!!! The 340 is a technological marvel (or the up-coming 787 or anything that has been out there in the last 30 years), but try calling it an AIRPLANE!!!! Like I warned above... just a few -cts...!!!
__________________
This is gold, Mr. Bond. All my life I've admired its color, its brilliance, its divine heaviness. I welcome any enterprise that will increase my stock...which is considerable! |
||
6 April 2008, 11:14 PM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Real Name: Mac
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,368
|
|
6 April 2008, 11:31 PM | #23 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Real Name: David
Location: US
Posts: 347
|
Quote:
what's the difference between a '57 corvette and a '08 zr6? what's the difference between frank lloyd wright and helmet jahn? what's the difference between a romanee conti and a present day pinot? it seems like you came here looking for a fight for some reason. there is no "right" answer to your question. the character, patina and "story" of a vintage watch is more desirable by some the a tight bracelet with no scratches and the latest blue parachrom doodads with a sapphire crystal. to each his own. i happen to have a collection now that's based only in the modern pieces. i'm currently on the hunt for vintage pieces because it will add depth to my collection and also what i consider a feeling of warmth. the 1680 red subs are absolutely charming and the 1675 acrylics are great too. if these vintage watches could tell stories, think of what they would be. i can't wait to find a red 1680 that talks to me. on another vintage forum, some guy just posted the entire history of a sub he picked up that included pictures and documentation from the original owner. it was truly fascinating to see the life of that watch. |
|
7 April 2008, 12:24 AM | #24 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Real Name: Tim
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,117
|
Quote:
There is something about vintage watches that appeal to some, and not to others. I say, to each his own
__________________
Daytona 116520 |
|
7 April 2008, 12:27 AM | #25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Kurt
Location: Philly Burbs!!
Posts: 3,296
|
Holly crap this thread is old.........
__________________
“This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the BLUE pill - the story ends; you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the RED pill - you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.” Rolex Submariner 116610LV Hulk | Rolex GMT 16710 Pepsi | Omega Speedmaster “Speedy Tuesday” | Tudor Black Bay 79220R “ETA Rose” | Tudor Pelagos Blue Dial | Rolex Submariner Yellow Gold 116618LB | Rolex Milgauss “Z-Blue” 116400GV |
7 April 2008, 02:33 AM | #26 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Bob
Location: Dallas, Texas
Watch: Daytona Meteorite
Posts: 3,413
|
I like the new ones better than the old ones. Unless the old one is a meteorite, and then i would like the old one. But if the new one is a meteorite, and the old one isn't, then I would pick the new one. In which case, I would have to take another look. Deciding without looking, makes you decide again after looking, so goes the old saying look before you leap, if you want to ...... what was I saying? Was I talking about the Meteorite again?
When in doubt, always pick the meteorite.
__________________
meteor flying to Earth onto my wrist... 116509 Daytona Meteorite, 116520 Daytona Black, 116710 GMTIIC, 16013 DATEJUST, CARTIER SANTOS 100 W20090X8, IWC Big Pilot, IWC Top Gun "Everything works out in the end. If it hasn't worked out, it's not the end." |
7 April 2008, 03:29 AM | #27 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Bob
Location: Dallas, Texas
Watch: Daytona Meteorite
Posts: 3,413
|
Quote:
well, its not a meteorite....
__________________
meteor flying to Earth onto my wrist... 116509 Daytona Meteorite, 116520 Daytona Black, 116710 GMTIIC, 16013 DATEJUST, CARTIER SANTOS 100 W20090X8, IWC Big Pilot, IWC Top Gun "Everything works out in the end. If it hasn't worked out, it's not the end." |
|
7 April 2008, 08:19 AM | #28 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 248
|
The older watches had lower initial productions and many have been destroyed, damaged or modified from factory spec over time. So an all-original watch in good condition is a rare commodity, and the ability to obtain something rare is a status symbol.
That said, most of the really rare or valuable watches don't get worn, and are in the collections of very wealthy or very fanatical watch enthusiasts. "Vintage" in most contexts is a euphemism for models that are no longer manufactured because it sounds better than "used" or "secondhand," but it isn't entirely appropriate, because, unlike wine, watches degrade rather than improve with age. |
28 December 2012, 12:08 PM | #29 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Point Blank, TX
Posts: 2,893
|
This thread has 3 of the first five TRF members on it. Looks like laager, molex, and mark have not been around for some time. I wander if they know how big TRF is now!
__________________
I once dated a girl in high school and her dad told me I would never amount to anything. He was right |
28 December 2012, 12:22 PM | #30 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Real Name: Dave
Location: CA
Watch: es
Posts: 4,361
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.