Vintage What is the Attraction?

[Dr. Robert]

oldies but goodies.......vintage has that "je ne sais quoi"..........






unlike computers, cars, appliances......a watch just has to tell time & look good!

[Gator08]

If you wanted the "best" in timekeeping you wouldn't have bought a Rolex at all! You bought it because you wanted one. I love my 5513 not because it's worth anything, but because, like everyone has stated there aren't THAT many out there exactly like mine. It's just a cool feeling

[nocrown]

To me vintage is aesthetically much more pleasing not only in terms of patina but also in simplicity. The new subs, for example, with the extra silver bits around the dials just seem more blinged out and to my eye are somewhat gaudy. To each his own.

And SteelersFan with his insanely gorgeous collection makes an excellent case in point; for e.g. put a new sub beside SF's vintage Red SEADWELLER's and if you don't get it, then you probably never will. IMNSHO.

And above water an iPhone is more accurate than any Rolex ;)

[cruvon]

Here's one for you, can't see how this could not beat a modern sub in looks atleast if not the quickset thing, but that's just me:)

[nocrown]

Tasty cruvon. Real tasty.

[TheVTCGuy]

Wow! I really appreciate all the effort and elequent explanations! I understand what a lot of you are saying, and it's true, I do appreciate the older stuff, but not for something I use daily, depend on. That probably makes even less sense, but I have a couple antique clocks, and I enjoy them very much, but they are not my primary time-keeping device. For that, I feel much more comfortable with the "latest and greatest" Anyway, thanks again for the answers!

[TheVTCGuy]

I like anything old - watches, cars, houses, furniture, pottery, clocks, single men who live in San Diego

Lisa! Stop teasing me!!!!


So let's see, Lisa is A. Beautiful B. Intelligent C. Acomplished D. Kind E. Fun... etc. Heck, even in my FANTASSY life she's WAY out of my league..

[cruvon]

Originally Posted by nocrown

Tasty cruvon. Real tasty.

Thanks:)

[cruvon]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Wow! I really appreciate all the effort and elequent explanations! I understand what a lot of you are saying, and it's true, I do appreciate the older stuff, but not for something I use daily, depend on. That probably makes even less sense, but I have a couple antique clocks, and I enjoy them very much, but they are not my primary time-keeping device. For that, I feel much more comfortable with the "latest and greatest" Anyway, thanks again for the answers!

Looks like you've been convinced to turn into a convert to vintage, even if it means for occasional use;)

[onkyo]

Vintage Rolex = character and feel

Modern Rolex = monotonous and boring ... despite improved technology.

I own both modern and vintage Rolex though my brain screams vintage.

[ElPrimero]

It's that 'personal opinion' choice again isn't it?

I can totally understand how people like vintage..... Cars, clocks, watches etc. But I myself prefer new, up to date stuff.

I did once spend a good bit of time searching for a 1968 Sub (birth year) however, once I found one and had it in my hand, I couldn't pull the trigger. It just felt too old and decrepit!..... (like me I suppose)

[MitchSteel]

I own both vintage and modern Rolex, as well as vintage and modern cars and guns, vintage stuff just has a soul i think, history known and unknown.just something about it.I keep my vintage"equipment' in tiptop shape and daily usable if desired, and thats the beauty of it.

[skyedog]

Originally Posted by Newportkrieger

Its all about the "hunt" for the perfect specimen, from your perspective and within the constraints of your budget. Maybe you want to find a vintage watch in NOS condition? Maybe you like one showing the character of use and care over the decades or maybe ones love of a particular year/model because of its appearance? Maybe a vintage watch awakens an old memory inside us of a father,mother or relative. Maybe just to seek out and collect soemthing hard to find. The reasons are as many as the individual.

Then there is the process... to become aware of what you want, to seek information that turns into an education that may change entirely what you seek.

Any idiot can win a lotto and stagger drunk into a Rolex AD or a new car dealership and buy something new off the shelf. Its an almost mindless exersize beyond deciding what you want.

To educate yourself on what you seek, its comparable worth and the condition you seek it in and then to cull through all the possibilities in the marketplace until you find the one that you like, KNOWING why you like it and KNOWING the nature of what you like....

Vintage is an exercise requiring equal parts of intellect and emotion. Buying NEW is just an exercise of emotion!

Very well said Steve

[cruvon]

Originally Posted by Newportkrieger

Its all about the "hunt" for the perfect specimen, from your perspective and within the constraints of your budget. Maybe you want to find a vintage watch in NOS condition? Maybe you like one showing the character of use and care over the decades or maybe ones love of a particular year/model because of its appearance? Maybe a vintage watch awakens an old memory inside us of a father,mother or relative. Maybe just to seek out and collect soemthing hard to find. The reasons are as many as the individual.

Then there is the process... to become aware of what you want, to seek information that turns into an education that may change entirely what you seek.

Any idiot can win a lotto and stagger drunk into a Rolex AD or a new car dealership and buy something new off the shelf. Its an almost mindless exersize beyond deciding what you want.

To educate yourself on what you seek, its comparable worth and the condition you seek it in and then to cull through all the possibilities in the marketplace until you find the one that you like, KNOWING why you like it and KNOWING the nature of what you like....

Vintage is an exercise requiring equal parts of intellect and emotion. Buying NEW is just an exercise of emotion!

well said:)

[Lisa]

Here's something else - Paul, you and a couple of other guys mentioned the desire to have the "latest and greatest" -- but something newer and greater will always come along and it seems that it would be tough to be content with what you have once its no longer the latest thing. I guess that's why people sell their older watches - so they can get the newest one.

Then again, people who like the vintage watches might do something similar... I'd wanted a vintage Omega for a while, and now I have one and am quite pleased with it. But if only I could find something with an exhibition back.... or a really pristine Constellation... or an original California Dial.... I guess there's always something out there to grab your attention, wherever your interests lie.

[T5AUS]

[QUOTE=oinkitt;2651376]I wouldnt waste time worrying about it. If its not in you, its not in you!!

I wish I didnt like "dead peoples crap" but I do. The only things I buy new are cloths and marterials for my businesses.

That's about it Adrian, if you don't get it then you won't, stick with what you feel comfortable with
PS I even get some of my clothes from op shops howe else can one afford to collect these pieces of crap lol

[landroverking]

There is vintage & then just old watches. In the Rolex line the Subs, GMTs, Daytons, Bubble Backs from 40s & 50s are just cooler than today's models IMHO.
There was a time you could buy two vintages for the price of on new one. Sadly for folks like me those days are long gone so I can understand some one just getting into watches wanting to buy new.

[Jagatai]

I can't stand how flat and shiny the sapphires are I hate the engraved rehaut.
WG surrounds are pointless to me.

[phelix_da_kat]

New is not always better.. be it techincally or asthetically

However.. My watches are going vintage, because it is the model or watch I wanted when I was younger - but, say when it comes to getting that station wagon / sport back /touring for my family, I will likely endup with a newer BMW/Audo/Merc as it is "technically " safer and more efficent on fuel.

You should buy what you want, not what other people want..
And this comes back to vintage - don't buy for investment, as it could come and bite you in the &$$. lol

[TheVTCGuy]

Excellent points everyone! I understand what you're saying about the attraction to older things.... (like ME for example) Anyway...

I guess my main... "concern" or "turn off" to a vintage timepiece being used for your primary source of time keeping, is that... well I have heard some of you say that "newer" is not always "better" and for some things I agree! We are too much in the modern era of cheap-plastic stuff that has no quality compared to the old days, you can use this argument in just about any product we have today. But for a fine timepiece, made by arguably the best watch company in the world (Rolex), if they put a new feature in to a watch (like the parachrome for example) wouldn't you accept the fact this new feature is an IMPROVEMENT? They know a lot more about watches then I do, I would have to believe that a newer watch with the newer parachrome is just a bit more efficient, or accurate, or whatever then the older version. How MUCH of an improvement is up for a tremendous debate, and another thread, but if I was spending that much money on an item like a Rolex, I would want the best possible, most accurate, efficient produt with all the latest improvements I could get!

I probably am explaining this all the wrong ways and I DO understand what a lot of you are saying. I sincerely congratulate you on your vintage pieces... maybe I'll become a convert yet!

[jdc]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Excellent points everyone! I understand what you're saying about the attraction to older things.... (like ME for example) Anyway...

I guess my main... "concern" or "turn off" to a vintage timepiece being used for your primary source of time keeping, is that... well I have heard some of you say that "newer" is not always "better" and for some things I agree! We are too much in the modern era of cheap-plastic stuff that has no quality compared to the old days, you can use this argument in just about any product we have today. But for a fine timepiece, made by arguably the best watch company in the world (Rolex), if they put a new feature in to a watch (like the parachrome for example) wouldn't you accept the fact this new feature is an IMPROVEMENT? They know a lot more about watches then I do, I would have to believe that a newer watch with the newer parachrome is just a bit more efficient, or accurate, or whatever then the older version. How MUCH of an improvement is up for a tremendous debate, and another thread, but if I was spending that much money on an item like a Rolex, I would want the best possible, most accurate, efficient produt with all the latest improvements I could get!

I probably am explaining this all the wrong ways and I DO understand what a lot of you are saying. I sincerely congratulate you on your vintage pieces... maybe I'll become a convert yet!

Most of the new changes like the pararchrome spring are just Rolex marketing drivel aimed at making people think that it is a major improvement where it is just a name for an in-house spring. The movements are all pretty similar over the years and many of the older watches will function/keep time as well as your Daytona. Bracelets have improved and marketing pressure by Rolex to have the latest model has increased. At the end of day new or modern Rolex ain't a bad way to go

[conrail]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

My AD called and said a vintage GMT was in did I want to see it. I went over, and tried it on. It wasn't even that old, serial number from 90 or 91.

I think that might be part of the lack of understanding. That watch you tried on wasn't really vintage. Try on a 1960s or 70s vintage Rolex watch and the charm might be more apparent. Vintage certainly isn't for everyone - you really do need to be bitten by the bug, so to speak. You need to fall in love with it the moment you see a true vintage Rolex piece in person, otherwise its probably not something you'd acquire with time (or maybe a long time). I had a SS Daytona much like you do (and still love that watch although I sold it) but the moment I saw a matte dialed vintage piece in person I thought "OH MY GOD, THAT'S BEAUTIFUL." What character and charm it exuded.

Try on a 1960s GMT with a faded pepsi insert, or a 70s 5513 with 2 lines and matte dial. Maybe one of those will give you the "ah ha" moment. And if not, no worries

[conrail]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Excellent points everyone! I understand what you're saying about the attraction to older things.... (like ME for example) Anyway...

I guess my main... "concern" or "turn off" to a vintage timepiece being used for your primary source of time keeping, is that... well I have heard some of you say that "newer" is not always "better" and for some things I agree! We are too much in the modern era of cheap-plastic stuff that has no quality compared to the old days, you can use this argument in just about any product we have today. But for a fine timepiece, made by arguably the best watch company in the world (Rolex), if they put a new feature in to a watch (like the parachrome for example) wouldn't you accept the fact this new feature is an IMPROVEMENT? They know a lot more about watches then I do, I would have to believe that a newer watch with the newer parachrome is just a bit more efficient, or accurate, or whatever then the older version. How MUCH of an improvement is up for a tremendous debate, and another thread, but if I was spending that much money on an item like a Rolex, I would want the best possible, most accurate, efficient produt with all the latest improvements I could get!

I probably am explaining this all the wrong ways and I DO understand what a lot of you are saying. I sincerely congratulate you on your vintage pieces... maybe I'll become a convert yet!

No arguments there, the modern Rolexes are made from first class materials with a first class finish to them. So the piece and its guts are "better" technologically, but where I tend to fade on them is with their character and charm. Modern pieces (to me at least) simply don't have it. They're all the same and most likely always will be, whereas vintage pieces all grew up differently and have different character to them. Certainly the movements and materials are inferior from an advancement-in-technology standpoint, but such "defects" are exactly what gave them their charm today. Faded paints, patina from the lume, etc.

[DiamondJack]

Great points everyone and a great thread.....

For me it's the history of the timepiece that has an attraction to me and the fact the watch has already "lived a life" and experienced "an existence" before I am lucky enough to take them into my care.

I also like the fact I need to hunt them down and, to a certain extent, the thrill of the chase. It's just too easy to wander into a store and buy a new one. You show your friends and if they want one, they can also wander in and get one too. In fact, even when you buy the more expensive new models, there are still too many people out there with that very same watch.

Having said that, I am in a quandry at the moment over a very expensive ALS Datograph Flyback or an early 60's excellent condition 5512. Decisions

[oldbronco]

[IMG]http:
I started as a watch buyer, just going to the store to buy a watch. then, I learned the thrill of the hunt, & I sold most of my contemporary stuff, & I became a watch collector. vintage watches have more panache, style, & history. vintage watches are superb time keepers. the photo is my circa 1937 Bubble Back that Bob Ridley restored to chronometer standards. recall the famous Omega 30mm movements that won numerous chronology competitions with "only" 17 jewels. so why does Rolex trumpet parachrome springs, etc. if it isn't progress? it's called marketing. Rolex sells 800,000 watches a year to watch buyers. the vast majority of watch buyers are not WIS, so you need a marketing gimmick. still, to each his own. just mho.

[oldbronco]

sorry, my photo didn't transmit. here it is, I hope.

[oldbronco]

another example of vintage panache. a 30mm Omega chronometer I mentioned.

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Excellent points everyone! I understand what you're saying about the attraction to older things.... (like ME for example) Anyway...

I guess my main... "concern" or "turn off" to a vintage timepiece being used for your primary source of time keeping, is that... well I have heard some of you say that "newer" is not always "better" and for some things I agree! We are too much in the modern era of cheap-plastic stuff that has no quality compared to the old days, you can use this argument in just about any product we have today. But for a fine timepiece, made by arguably the best watch company in the world (Rolex), if they put a new feature in to a watch (like the parachrome for example) wouldn't you accept the fact this new feature is an IMPROVEMENT? They know a lot more about watches then I do, I would have to believe that a newer watch with the newer parachrome is just a bit more efficient, or accurate, or whatever then the older version. How MUCH of an improvement is up for a tremendous debate, and another thread, but if I was spending that much money on an item like a Rolex, I would want the best possible, most accurate, efficient produt with all the latest improvements I could get!

I probably am explaining this all the wrong ways and I DO understand what a lot of you are saying. I sincerely congratulate you on your vintage pieces... maybe I'll become a convert yet!

Paul, I guess you could say that the Parachrome hairspring is an "improvement". However, in some ways.......I see it as a disadvantage when compared to the older models because to me it means "less deviation in timekeeping". Let me give you an example: My WG submariner keeps exceptional time. However, it always gains the same amount of time regardless of what position you place it in when it is not worn. With my 40 year-old 5513, I can self-regulate it to be almost spot-on for weeks at a time by placing it in different positions when it is not worn. It already keeps exceptional time when on the wrist ( ~+1.5 sec/day), but this can be further regulated when necessary to either gain/lose time at night when I am not wearing it. It is a great daily watch because it keeps such good time. I can't see how wearing one of my modern watches would be an advantage.

IMHO, this deviation in timekeeping is a bit of the charm of having a vintage watch.

[nocrown]

an iPhone keeps perfect time ;) .

everything else is kinetic jewelry......unless diving or extreme sporting...

[BH13GMT]

I do get the Vintage thing, I would like to source a 1972 1680 Red Sub as my birth year watch at some point, funds/wife permitting. i have started doing my homework and it will involve a book purchase or 2. Talking to Diamond Jack at the London GTG and trying on his splendid Red Sub sealed the deal for me.

Talking of what is good about Vintage, who wouldnt spend an evening with Raquel Welch?????

And Paul, I have claimed her for my fantasy life, hands off my friend