Seeking Advice on Oyster Speedking Precision

[mrk1]

Hey guys!

I'm strongly considering purchasing my first Rolex with this Speedking that has caught my eye. Was hoping to get some thoughts and advice on it first, from some people that know a lot more about these watches than myself!

The watch is listed at approx. $1800USD

I am also aware that the watch is very much on the small size, I currently wear a 34mm watch.

Here's the description from the item page:

A rare Rolex Oyster Speedking from the year 1963 (serial 8418xx). This watch is provided with the manual Rolex calibre and still runs within the chronometer specifications accuracy wise.

The dial has some patina but nothing special or rare. The hands are original to this type of watch and in very nice vintage condition with the original blued seconds hand. The case is pretty scratched but thick and when polished it can be fresh again. We don't polish Rolex, so that's up to you and calculated within this bargain.

We left this watch 'as is', no polish, no service history. Crown is original 'Rolex Oyster' signed and correct for this watch.

Reference number 6020
Brand Rolex
Model Oyster Precision
Movement Manual winding
Case material Steel
Year of production 1963
Condition Fair (Obvious signs of wear or scratches)
Scope of delivery
No original box, no original papers
Gender Men's watch/Unisex

Movement Manual winding

Case material Steel
Case diameter 30 mm
Crystal Plexiglass
Dial Gold

Thanks guys! I'd really appreciate any help I could get.

[motoikkyu]

These are fine watches but they do wear SMALL. This is smaller than a bubbleback and it's noticeable. My brother wears one regularly, he is 5'5", about 140lbs and it looks fine on him. I think the price is rather strong for a tiny, manual-wind watch BUT if the piece speaks to you, it's not extraordinarily high. I would expect to pay $1300-$1600 for a watch like this, more toward the low end because of the gold color, but markets are different in different parts of the world (my 6694 is worth nearly $1K USD more in the UK than in the USA).

[Tools]

Nice looking watch.

This watch is from ~1953, not 1963..

[R.W.T.]

The case is obviously not stainless steel. It's a GOLD case with a stainless back.
It was NEVER chronometer rated.

[MILGAUSS88]

Originally Posted by R.W.T.

The case is obviously not stainless steel. It's a GOLD case with a stainless back.
It was NEVER chronometer rated.

Gold or gold-filled? I thought they only put the steel backs on filled cases?

[motoikkyu]

Thank you, R.W.T. for pointing that out, I stand corrected. $1800 is fair for a gold case example.

[Oyster Sauce]

Can't comment on the functionality/market value, but I love the esthetic of that one.

[MILGAUSS88]

I am still thinking that is a gold filled case. In which case the price would be quite high.

A. I do not see any hallmark on the back of the lug, any others I found on the net have one.
B. In the last photo that appears to be brass rubbing through the sides, not chamfers.

[CTech]

That is almost certainly a gold plated case, so I agree with Milgauss88.

Apart from the stainless steel case back, the lack of a hallmark and the clear statement in the sales description that it is a stainless steel case:

1. The color is typical of gold plated cases and is not typical of solid gold cases.

2. The type of scratches are consistent with having a hard (steel) case covered with a thin, softer plating. Scratches on a solid gold case look quite different and have less well defined edges, more like a smearing action.

[MILGAUSS88]

All the gold over steel cases I have seen have open steel lugs on the back, like the ref 1550.
When trying to determine if a watch is gold filled, the biggest giveaway is brass coming through on the corners, and this appears to be what has happened here, to me.