Sea Dweller 4000 Shortest run ??

[nyfida]

I'm curious , in the history of Rolex , would this be the shortest run ever or were more like this ?

If it is , I would say this watch will be super collectible in the years to come.

What is everyone's guess here ?

[Zippy+]

My guess would be yes ! How long before they are selling for £10000.

[Etschell]

a mark 1 16610lv with flat 4 was like a few months with a certain serial.

[jagwap]

Explorer 39mm with short hands wasn't out long...

[anakyn101]

Very short run indeed..load them up ;)

[SeaDweller50]

Originally Posted by Etschell

a mark 1 16610lv with flat 4 was like a few months with a certain serial.

Err not quite the same, really, is it?

[SeaDweller50]

Originally Posted by jagwap

Explorer 39mm with short hands wasn't out long...

Nor this. The Op is talking about a complete watch reference, not some font or hand size change.

[DCheeta]

Originally Posted by Airborne

Nor this. The Op is talking about a complete watch reference, not some font or hand size change.

Yeah, big difference.

The 116600 as a reference lasted only 30 months, from what I've heard people saying around here. How long did other transitional models last? Like the 16660?

And, would you even consider the 116600 a "transitional" model?

[fishingbear]

Originally Posted by Airborne

Nor this. The Op is talking about a complete watch reference, not some font or hand size change.

Originally Posted by DCheeta

And, would you even consider the 116600 a "transitional" model?

Agree, the 116600 reference is a lot different, and in no way a "transitional" model.
It's brand new total case design and reference discontinued after only 30 months production stands as an anomaly with the history of any other Rolex references.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by Airborne

Err not quite the same, really, is it?

perhaps not but ill bet you a nickle it will be worth far more than the sd4k in 20 years.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by Etschell

perhaps not but ill bet you a nickle it will be worth far more than the sd4k in 20 years.

That's a given if you're talking Y serials there weren't anywhere near as many made as 116600.

[bod42zx]

It was an official 30 month run but we know they stopped turning up in at dealer's roughly 9 months before the discontinuation.
Having said that, they were always in ADs and not selling well as is well documented elsewhere, for at least 19-20 months.
My very rough guess would be the production run probably went into six figures but maybe not much more than that.
Is that rare? Or to return to the OP's question, does it make it collectible? I defer to others this board with a much greater knowledge of the historic models and their production numbers...

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by GB-man

That's a given if you're talking Y serials there weren't anywhere near as many made as 116600.

okay any flat 4 16610lv. in fact any 16610lv.

just getting a bit fed up with the "it's rarer now should i buy it" threads.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by Etschell

okay any flat 4 16610lv. in fact any 16610lv.

Okay then..any 16610LV you're on. I'll be contacting you in 20 years for my nickel

[JP Chestnut]

The Rolex 5100 was a much shorter run. It's probably the lowest total production (reference level, not some BS font change stuff) post 1970.

[SeaDweller50]

Originally Posted by JP Chestnut

The Rolex 5100 was a much shorter run. It's probably the lowest total production (reference level, not some BS font change stuff) post 1970.

It's a quartz, no wonder. Lol

[Fiddich]

I have no doubt in my mind that the value will shoot up. When? Dunno.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Okay then..any 16610LV you're on. I'll be contacting you in 20 years for my nickel

by that point it will be 25 cents.

[brettpaul]

Actually think the random serial 16610 LV was also a very short production run in 2010....probably shorter than the Y serial in 2003.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by brettpaul

Actually think the random serial 16610 LV was also a very short production run in 2010....probably shorter than the Y serial in 2003.

shorter than a few months?

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by Etschell

by that point it will be 25 cents.

I'm good for it.

[brettpaul]

Originally Posted by Etschell

shorter than a few months?

I think so - the reason being I've seen many forum members with Y serial LVs and I believe I'm one of 2-3 members who have a random serial LV.

One never knows for sure but based on what I've seen on the forum and in the market the randoms are more rare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by nyfida

I'm curious , in the history of Rolex , would this be the shortest run ever or were more like this ?

If it is , I would say this watch will be super collectible in the years to come.

What is everyone's guess here ?

If we have posts like this weekly once which create the so called Internet hype, yes demand will increase and it will be collectible!

[Qwerty01]

I have a 116600 myself and ofcourse I want the production to be low. However the thing is that eventhough production is only 30 months but the rate Rolex are shaving out their new watches must be exponentially higher than compared to 20-30 years ago.
So maybe 30 months now equals 3-5 years production cycle in the past? Just my thought.......

[AK797]

Originally Posted by GB-man

I'm good for it.

I don't doubt you two will still be on this forum in 20 years time.

[shalako]

For most people that own the SD4K it was the perfect sports Rolex, combined with an incredibly short production it has all the ingredient to become very collectable within a fairly short space of time. I would have thought most serious Rolex collectors will want one.....time will tell of course but in a few years I wouldn't be at all surprised if some SD43 owners would happily add cash to trade their SD43 for a 'rare' 116600.

[116710er]

SD4K, SD43....eh, get both!

[Fabrice M]

Originally Posted by bod42zx

It was an official 30 month run but we know they stopped turning up in at dealer's roughly 9 months before the discontinuation.
Having said that, they were always in ADs and not selling well as is well documented elsewhere, for at least 19-20 months.
My very rough guess would be the production run probably went into six figures but maybe not much more than that.
Is that rare? Or to return to the OP's question, does it make it collectible? I defer to others this board with a much greater knowledge of the historic models and their production numbers...

I am fairly certain that the sd4k production was far less than 100k. Rolex produces about 1 millions watches per year, of course Rolex doesn’t publishes stats, but COSC does. The Sea Dweller is a niche market for Rolex, one of their least popular model, very small production to begin with, most people who buy a Rolex dive watch buy the sub. Not to say that dive watches aren’t the most popular Rolex to begin with. I wouldn’t be surprised if the total SD4k production was less than 30k.

[Londonboy]

People often mention "short production run" especially on a watch that has major, and obvious differences to its stable mates (eg, in this instance, let's just use the case, as the case is only for this model). But in reality (in this instance) it's an agreed amount of cases, and if it doesn't sell well, no extra cases would be made as they couldn't use them "elsewhere" within the Rolex line up. I doubt that they were made for anything like 30 months imho, maybe that's just the amount of time that they were officially available.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by DCheeta

And, would you even consider the 116600 a "transitional" model?

Good question.
I would say yes.
And it holds a very special place in the history of the model.