5512 question. SN 4.7 correct?

[Keldw]

Good morning (at least here) good folks,

Ive been offered a 5512 in a pretty good condition.

I have two questions though :

1. I´ve read some places, that 4.7 SN is associated with service cases, is this an absolute correct?

2. The serial suggests that the watch is from 1959. For that year, would this dial be correct? It really seems to me like a "bart simpson" coronet?


All feedback is greatly appreciated!

These are the only two pics I have so far.

Have a great weekend,

Keld

[jedly1]

4.7 million is a service case, with rounded crown guards most probably saying original rolex design between the lugs rather than registered design

470000 (not million) is a 1959 ish case most likely square or eagle beak case....


a 4 line non chapter ring dial would not belong in a 470000 case.

one other possibility is that if you only see 6 digits , the one has actually gone faint or rubbed off....and the serial is /was 1.47 which would make sense....if you see 7 digits beginning 47 its recased

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by jedly1

one other possibility is that if you only see 6 digits , the one has actually gone faint or rubbed off....and the serial is /was 1.47 which would make sense....

[ADINVA]

jedly,

Learn something new again today. :)

[teeva3333]

totally agree w Jed. 1.47 wud be perfect for this bart coronet variant

[Keldw]

Originally Posted by jedly1

4.7 million is a service case, with rounded crown guards most probably saying original rolex design between the lugs rather than registered design

470000 (not million) is a 1959 ish case most likely square or eagle beak case....


a 4 line non chapter ring dial would not belong in a 470000 case.

one other possibility is that if you only see 6 digits , the one has actually gone faint or rubbed off....and the serial is /was 1.47 which would make sense....if you see 7 digits beginning 47 its recased

Thank you so much for the feedback. I've been more or less offline due to work, so haven't checked in before last night.

Went at saw the watch in question again today.

Unfortunately, there are no signs of a 1. All other digits were pretty sharp and visible so unless the 1 has been completely rubbed off, well then I honestly don't know.

Serial is definitely 6 digits (477.xxx). Inscription between the lugs says "registered design".

IF it was a 1.4 everything would have checked out. Dial, case etc.

I doubt that even back then, that quality control, could've been so sloppy that they somehow did not write the correct serial?

[jedly1]

Originally Posted by Keldw

Thank you so much for the feedback. I've been more or less offline due to work, so haven't checked in before last night.

Went at saw the watch in question again today.

Unfortunately, there are no signs of a 1. All other digits were pretty sharp and visible so unless the 1 has been completely rubbed off, well then I honestly don't know.

Serial is definitely 6 digits (477.xxx). Inscription between the lugs says "registered design".

IF it was a 1.4 everything would have checked out. Dial, case etc.

I doubt that even back then, that quality control, could've been so sloppy that they somehow did not write the correct serial?

Ok so not a service replaced case.

Was it round crown guards or pointed ?

And was the 5512 above or below the registered design ?

Any chance you had a look inside back ?

Or better still got any macro pics ?

[Keldw]

Originally Posted by jedly1

Ok so not a service replaced case.

Was it round crown guards or pointed ?

And was the 5512 above or below the registered design ?

Any chance you had a look inside back ?

Or better still got any macro pics ?

Managed to sneak a few pics (phone quality I'm afraid).

5512 was below REGISTERED DESIGN

Back case reads 5513 66.

Seller has pictures of movement and it seems good. Went through service with AD December last year.

Here's pics I managed to snap.

[Keldw]

One more

[Keldw]

One more I took

[Keldw]

Sorry, wrong pic

[Keldw]

Case back

[Keldw]

Movement

[jedly1]

werll think its one of those that there will never be a full answer to….

its for sure not an original 6 digit case

could be ;

1. a case that the '1' got missed off….highly unlikely.

2. a cases the '1' has rubbed off….most likely

3. a case that was replaced and renumbered when rolex still did this …but then that would make little sense given the later dial, later back etc.

[Keldw]

Originally Posted by jedly1

werll think its one of those that there will never be a full answer to….

its for sure not an original 6 digit case

could be ;

1. a case that the '1' got missed off….highly unlikely.

2. a cases the '1' has rubbed off….most likely

3. a case that was replaced and renumbered when rolex still did this …but then that would make little sense given the later dial, later back etc.

1. I agree
2 .What im thinking
3. I agree

Price is/was around 9500USD before I noticed the serial. He´s open to bidding.

Problem is, if I was ever to sell it, id probably have a hard time doing so

[Keldw]

Okay, so I went on the googles and searched "rolex 5512" + "1477926" which is what presumably would be the correct serial number.

The result was this https://auctionata.com/intl/o/82826/...nd-around-1965

I am 100% positive that it is the exact same case and case back. The case even has the same large scratch on the outer side of the lower right lug.

The insert is different though and so is the dial (i think).

What to make of that?

[mdw3]

Looks different insert, but likely same dial even.

[Keldw]

Originally Posted by mdw3

Looks different insert, but likely same dial even.

Insert is definitely different. The dial looks very much the same, except that the watch today has a slight smudge on the letters in the words "superlative" and "officially".

Seller agrees that the watch is the same, as previous owner purchased it at an auction.