Birth Year Watches

[DrThurmanMerman]

Anyone here end up getting a birth year watch? What did you get and why did you choose it?

[rushca01]

I’ve been looking for a few years for a 1983 16660 with the non white gold surrounds. Why the 16660, because I have thing for Sea Dwellers, apparently this transitional model is bit more expensive.

[Dan S]

I tend to think that birth year watches are silly, but if you really care about it being a birth year watch, it needs to be verifiable IMO, not just estimated by the serial number. I don't see the point in trying hard to buy a birth year watch, only to end up with something that is approximately from your birth year. So with Rolex, you're limited to watches with the original paperwork, which are uncommon.

Better examples are military issued watches with the issue year on the case-back, brands that engrave the production year on the case (e.g. Seiko/Grand Seiko/Bulova), or watches from brands that provide extracts from their archives. I have several birth year watches that fall into these categories, but they were purchased because I happened to find appealing watches in good condition, and the fact that they were from my birth year was incidental. In the end, I don't value them any more than watches that are a few years older or younger. Condition and overall appeal matter much more to me.

[jcarm981]

Originally Posted by Dan S

I tend to think that birth year watches are silly, but if you really care about it being a birth year watch, it needs to be verifiable IMO, not just estimated by the serial number. I don't see the point in trying hard to buy a birth year watch, only to end up with something that is approximately from your birth year. So with Rolex, you're limited to watches with the original paperwork, which are uncommon.

Better examples are military issued watches with the issue year on the case-back, brands that engrave the production year on the case (e.g. Seiko/Grand Seiko/Bulova), or watches from brands that provide extracts from their archives. I have several birth year watches that fall into these categories, but they were purchased because I happened to find appealing watches in good condition, and the fact that they were from my birth year was incidental. In the end, I don't value them any more than watches that are a few years older or younger. Condition and overall appeal matter much more to me.

Well said, Dan

[MorningTundra]

Originally Posted by jcarm981

Well said, Dan

I’m of the same opinion, though I appreciate the sentimental significance. Once a case has been engraved, how long does it sit around before becoming a complete watch? At best you’re looking at a birth year mid case. When is a watch born? When it’s paired with a movement? When it leaves the factory? When it’s first sold?

[herts9]

I think birth year watches are silly as well. But that said, I picked up one that was made close to when I entered this world.

Why a 1675? Not sure. Pretty colors? Yeah, I'll go with that.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

I thought it was sort of a romantic notion, so I picked one up quite a few years back.

1967 - 5513 meters first (1.7m serial) all original, mint condition.

I really, really wanted to love that watch but unfortunately I just never bonded with it. It always felt a bit fragile ... like I was wearing a museum piece. I know flame me guys

I don't regret it, but it did help me realize I'm not a four digit guy.IMG_20151222_110227.jpg

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[zapokee]

I have a couple of birth year watches that coincidentally happen to be from my birth year. I don't feel any extra bond with them from this.

Insisting on a birth year watch significantly narrows your pool of availablity for a decent piece.

You also can't know it was made exactly in your birth year - dating is only approximate. This renders the whole exercise pointless in the first place.

(Which is pretty much what Dan said. )

[springer]

I never fell for the silly notion of having the need to own a "birth year" watch that was originally propagated by watch dealers and later by collectors.

So, in short, no I don't have a birth year watch and don't plan on having one.

[chocopeluche]

I would go for a 16800 if I was born two years earlier, not a big fan of the WGS on the later models which overlap with my birth year.

[CFR]

Watches made when I was a kid, say 3-10 years old, are more evocative than a watch made in my birth year would be (because I have no memories of a time before I was about 3).

[RolexGonz]

I like pre-birth year watches :)

I was born in 1980 and have a 79 1680 and a 71 1675.

[Mk2rick]

while i am actively hunting one, i do agree that its more sentimental a reason. No right or wrong here.

It would be nice to know that the watch has been on this earth the same time as you, and the fairytale notion that you will "grow old" with it..

Again, silly but sometimes not everything has to be logical :)

[R44]

Mine came about by coincidence and was in no way intentional. I’d been looking a couple of years for a 1680 Red when I found the perfect watch for me in terms of condition and patina. It just happened to be a 71 which is my birth year, I do find the idea of birth year watches a bit pointless and would advise anyone to take time to hunt for the very best example of the model watch they are looking for rather than limit themselves to the much smaller pool of birth year watches.

[swatty]

I have 2 , as I collect dive watches I have a 1964 5513 gilt and a Tudor 7928.
I have also have 2002 Submariner that is my sons birth year. Imagine my surprise when I checked the paper work and the date of sale is one day after his birthday. I will give it to him when he turns 21.

[Andad]

Hey Peter, you don’t happen to have a ‘48 MGTC BRG in your stable do you?

[swatty]

Originally Posted by Andad

Hey Peter, you don’t happen to have a ‘48 MGTC BRG in your stable do you?

No sorry

[Zaslice]

I like the idea of having a watch that’s as old as I am. I picked up a 18038 years ago when prices were very reasonable and I wanted gold. Not an exact science but according to online production date ranges it’s close enough for me. Sports models were too involved with the minutiae (and expensive) good luck!

[inadeje]

I have a 1968 birth year 5513. My intrigue stemmed from wearing and looking at a watch sold to someone on the year I entered this earth. Something pretty cool about that, and the fact that it’s a rolex only ads to the brand’s legacy, around way before me.

[Widows Son]

I was at my watchmaker one day getting a crystal replaced. I usually ask if he has anything interesting for sale. He retrieved a mint 6424 Oyster. The price was rock bottom. I asked his when it was made, he responded and it happened to be my birth year(1959). It followed me home.

[1watch]

Originally Posted by Dan S

I tend to think that birth year watches are silly, but if you really care about it being a birth year watch, it needs to be verifiable IMO, not just estimated by the serial number. I don't see the point in trying hard to buy a birth year watch, only to end up with something that is approximately from your birth year. So with Rolex, you're limited to watches with the original paperwork, which are uncommon.

Better examples are military issued watches with the issue year on the case-back, brands that engrave the production year on the case (e.g. Seiko/Grand Seiko/Bulova), or watches from brands that provide extracts from their archives. I have several birth year watches that fall into these categories, but they were purchased because I happened to find appealing watches in good condition, and the fact that they were from my birth year was incidental. In the end, I don't value them any more than watches that are a few years older or younger. Condition and overall appeal matter much more to me.

Agree. It’s only interesting to me if the condition is what I want for a given price and it happens to be from my year of birth as a novelty, but not the focus of purchase


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cts]

Question for all of you who have a vintage Rolex (1970 and earlier)...

While winding, is the sound louder with these older timepieces vs newer ones (2000-current)? Thanks gentlemen!!!

[zapokee]

Originally Posted by Widows Son

I was at my watchmaker one day getting a crystal replaced. I usually ask if he has anything interesting for sale. He retrieved a mint 6424 Oyster. The price was rock bottom. I asked his when it was made, he responded and it happened to be my birth year(1959). It followed me home.

You know we're all wanting a photo of it. Come on...

[00Seven]

I have one; a 1986 Sea-Dweller. It’s a transitionional 16660. If you think it’s cool, then that’s all that matters. Don’t worry about validation from a bunch of nerds on a watch forum.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by 00Seven

I have one; a 1986 Sea-Dweller. It’s a transitionional 16660. If you think it’s cool, then that’s all that matters. Don’t worry about validation from a bunch of nerds on a watch forum.

Nerds????????????

[1976]

My 2 birth year watches (1976) with papers

It was a long search but it was fun to do and worth it: very happy with both!

[00Seven]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

Nerds????????????

Myself included.

[KaVo8]

Originally Posted by brandrea

I thought it was sort of a romantic notion, so I picked one up quite a few years back.

1967 - 5513 meters first (1.7m serial) all original, mint condition.

I really, really wanted to love that watch but unfortunately I just never bonded with it. It always felt a bit fragile ... like I was wearing a museum piece. I know flame me guys

I don't regret it, but it did help me realize I'm not a four digit guy.Attachment 1228834

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

Very nice Brian, is it still with you, since you didn’t bond with it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by KaVo8

Very nice Brian, is it still with you, since you didn’t bond with it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was a beauty indeed Kevin

I had it about 2 years and eventually I moved it on to a vintage dealer here.

I got what I paid for it so I was happy. Now they sell for about twice that amount

[7enderbender]

Originally Posted by rushca01

I’ve been looking for a few years for a 1983 16660 with the non white gold surrounds. Why the 16660, because I have thing for Sea Dwellers, apparently this transitional model is bit more expensive.

As an old geezer born in 1970 going Sea Dweller is a bit more challenging. BUT I was able to get a nice 2006 model which is my son’s birth year.
16600 strikes the perfect balance of Rolex features for me.