Daytona 6241's serial numbers up to??

[duff2691]

Hi All,
Does anyone know up to what serial number Daytona 6241's continued? Mine is 2558907 and some experts say that fine, albeit quite late in 6241 production and others say that 6241 production stopped before this number.
As you can imagine, this is important because it determines the watches authenticity.
Thanks in advance.

[duff2691]

If no one in this expert forum knows the answer to this question, then I'm definitely going to doubt the "experts" that have suggested that 6241's didn't run to serial 2558907!

[roh123]

Originally Posted by duff2691

If no one in this expert forum knows the answer to this question, then I'm definitely going to doubt the "experts" that have suggested that 6241's didn't run to serial 2558907!

I replied to your last thread. It is into 6264 territory but not impossible. Show us good pics of the engravings between the lugs and we will be able to tell you for sure.

[ianmcg]

Originally Posted by roh123

I replied to your last thread. It is into 6264 territory but not impossible. Show us good pics of the engravings between the lugs and we will be able to tell you for sure.

Agree.

As an owner I’ve a keen interest in 6241s and seen dozens of serial numbers over the years and highest I’ve ever seen is a batch around 237xxxx. And 6264 definitely starts in the 237xxxx area. Lots of 6264s and 6262s there.

FWIW I have seen at least one 6264 with a 6241 caseback.

As ever anything can happen but I have never seen a 6241 or 6239 (from a sample of over a hundred) in the 25xxxxx region and bear in mind 6263s start at 26xxxxx.

Ian

[roh123]

Originally Posted by ianmcg

Agree.

..and bear in mind 6263s start at 26xxxxx.

Ian

The first 6263’s are actually 2.0 million.

[duff2691]

Hi Guys, not sure why but it's only now that I'm seeing your posts. Thought I was on my own.
Please have a look at the attached (not great) pics. This watch was restored in 2007 by Rolex but I don't have the paperwork. I am still in contact with the watchmaker that did the restoration and he remains adamant that the case is genuine.
Your thoughts would be very much appreciated.

[roh123]

I’d be curious of others opinion. I’m not 100% convinced. Hope I am wrong.

[ianmcg]

Originally Posted by roh123

The first 6263’s are actually 2.0 million.

You’re right. I just looked forward from the last 6241 to find the next 6263 to make an observation that the 6264 would get squeezed out if there weren’t a bit more of a gap.

However, the 6263s I’ve seen at 208xxxx and 219xxxx (7 in total) were all Newmans. Were there also regular 6263s there too?

Ian

[roh123]

Originally Posted by ianmcg

You’re right. I just looked forward from the last 6241 to find the next 6263 to make an observation that the 6264 would get squeezed out if there weren’t a bit more of a gap.

However, the 6263s I’ve seen at 208xxxx and 219xxxx (7 in total) were all Newmans. Were there also regular 6263s there too?

Ian

Not sure. The earliest 2.0 ones I know are all Newmans. The first 6265 in Puccis Daytona bible is a non-Newman gold Daytona with 2.3m.

[duff2691]

Thanks for your thoughts so far. I'm not an expert like you guys but have had to do a lot of research on this watch and it seems as though there's no definitive answer, i.e. the last 6241 made was serial 2.......
I want to sell the watch and can't do that until I'm certain it is all genuine, although my watchmaker friend at the RSC is certainly sure. Having lost the paperwork from the restoration he did, maybe the way to go is to send it off to him for a service again, since I hear that a RSC service card is as good as a certificate of authenticity. I don't know, I must admit I'm a little lost on this one. Watch is beautiful though, and keeps much better time than my Sub 1680.

[roh123]

Reach out to a few dealers and you will know. If authentic they will be very eager to buy.

[ianmcg]

The pictures aren’t good enough to be that helpful but I think the dial is earlier than the serial number. The dial looks real enough but the picture is not sharp enough to see the font properly.

The wide Daytona writing at 12 o’clock starts early in the Daytona timeline and they switched to writing the Daytona curved around the 6 o’clock sub dial a lot earlier than 2.5

It’s also unusual to see a 6241 that doesn’t have a Newman dial in it.

The crystal and bezel are service replacements.

Interesting to hear what a putative buyer thinks...

[roh123]

Originally Posted by ianmcg

It’s also unusual to see a 6241 that doesn’t have a Newman dial in it.

This is because a lot of 6241s got Newman dials as a 6241PN commands a premium compared to a 6239PN. Actually very refreshing to see 6241 non-Newmans. Too many have had the dial switched imho.

Only me not liking the serial engraving? Might be the picture or just me being wrong..

[ianmcg]

As I mentioned I don't think this dial is original to the watch either...

And the bezel isn't on straight.

The photos aren't great but there are too many odd things that it's time to give the OP a break and quit looking for things.

The original question was about the serial number and there's no doubt that it's unusually high...



Ian

[duff2691]

Thanks Guys. Yes, maybe we're looking too hard. I'd already taken these pic's, so here they are anyway.
And yes, the bezel is off-centre and you're right, it was replaced during the restoration at the RSC. Sort of wish I hadn't done that now.

[duff2691]

Just noticed I had the hands over the letters.