The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Brei

[Kaplan]

The 1016 is my favourite Explorer

...

My workout buddy told me my arms need more work. I told him his wrist game needs more work. Boooom!

[VIDEO][/VIDEO]

 

[Cleav]

Flake- love that Bp, thanks for the share. Very noice

 

[Dino944]

Stitchy, what vintage would that 1016 be?

If the box is correct for that watch, and the owner didn't buy it later and sell the watch with a newer box, I'd guess the watch is from the late 1980s. Although they were produced from the early 60s to around 1989.

It's an old explorer, that is very desirable for some reason. I'm not exactly sure the history, but a standard vintage explore seems to go for about 1500 and these fetch 6-8k or more.

Maybe someone here who knows more about the history can explain what the story is. I would certainly like to know, as I haven't really looked into it yet.

There are lots of Explorer variations (probably the rarest being sold in Japan and instead of saying Explorer on the dial they say Space-Dweller and were only made for a year or two IIRC). However, the 1016 just seems to be popular. Its not rare as it was in production from the early 1960s to 1989.

IIRCO in the early 1980s the 1016 had a list price of around $800 and you could buy them all day long with a discount of 25% off MSRP. They started to go up a bit in value in the 1990s, but I think they really jumped in value after the 14270 Explorer went out of production and there were rumors that the Explorer was going to be discontinued. Not true, as the 114270 was released, but it seemed there was a bit of a lag between the release end of the 14270's production and the announcement of the 114270's release/production. During that time values on 14270s also went up significantly (but have since fallen).

In the Explorer's earlier years they were supposed to be more rugged than an average Rolex, and they were also supposed lubricated with oil that would allow the watch to function in either extreme cold or extreme heat. In addition, a Rolex catalog I have from the 1970s seemed to indicated that 1016 and 1655 were water resistant to 100 meters when all other Rolex watches (except for Subs and SDs) were only water resistant to 50.

The 1016 is a nice piece of Rolex history, but IMHO has never really been worth their current values. In that range I'd take a vintage Sub or GMT, or a 114270 and still have some money left for another watch. Just my 2 cents.

Dino will expound on this in great detail but wasn't the 1016 widely associated with several "historical" cool stuff:

1. Sir Edmund Hillary - or Tenzing Norgay - wearing the piece when they summited Mt Everest. Long discussion about whether or not they actually wore the pieces or if they just brought some that Rolex provided for them along for the ride.

2. The 1016 is the original "James Bond" watch from the Sir Ian Fleming novels (not the movies). Fleming himself probably wore a 1016 and incorporated it into the Bond character in the first novels.

Other possible factors?

/****** Apparently I live on Instagram too - mainly timepieces, shoes, attire and the occasional cheeseburger. @no_frills_vc. ******/

Ha...funny Frills. While an Explorer was involved in climbing Everest, it wasn't a 1016 (hadn't been produced yet). Also, while an Explorer is the watch in the Bond novels, I'm not sure if he specified a particular model of Explorer or if he just described a Rolex that most believe was an Explorer. The 1016 is a nice watch, and its probably the vintage Explorer most people think of when you say vintage Explorer, but I don't see the 1016 itself as having lots of historic things associated with it.

 

[TC (Houston)]

What is the healthy amount of time to ignore all your other watches after you get a grail piece? I'm thinking 10-14 days.

 

[Cleav]

Frills and. Dino

Great reading, many thanks for taking the time

I found this info link to an auction, if you're interested, good read in conjunction with your fascinating poast Dino. You're the man

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/2010/1...watch-collection-a-chance-to-own-the-ori.html

 

[in stitches]



What is the healthy amount of time to ignore all your other watches after you get a grail piece? I'm thinking 10-14 days.

my ToG cost me a panny as it never made it back to the wrist. i hope you dont encounter the same.

--

dino, great info, thanks! ours is from late 60s early 70s iirc.

 

[Dino944]

What is the healthy amount of time to ignore all your other watches after you get a grail piece? I'm thinking 10-14 days.

I've gone much longer

 

[no frills]

If the box is correct for that watch, and the owner didn't buy it later and sell the watch with a newer box, I'd guess the watch is from the late 1980s. Although they were produced from the early 60s to around 1989.

There are lots of Explorer variations (probably the rarest being sold in Japan and instead of saying Explorer on the dial they say Space-Dweller and were only made for a year or two IIRC). However, the 1016 just seems to be popular. Its not rare as it was in production from the early 1960s to 1989.

IIRCO in the early 1980s the 1016 had a list price of around $800 and you could buy them all day long with a discount of 25% off MSRP. They started to go up a bit in value in the 1990s, but I think they really jumped in value after the 14270 Explorer went out of production and there were rumors that the Explorer was going to be discontinued. Not true, as the 114270 was released, but it seemed there was a bit of a lag between the release end of the 14270's production and the announcement of the 114270's release/production. During that time values on 14270s also went up significantly (but have since fallen).

In the Explorer's earlier years they were supposed to be more rugged than an average Rolex, and they were also supposed lubricated with oil that would allow the watch to function in either extreme cold or extreme heat. In addition, a Rolex catalog I have from the 1970s seemed to indicated that 1016 and 1655 were water resistant to 100 meters when all other Rolex watches (except for Subs and SDs) were only water resistant to 50.

The 1016 is a nice piece of Rolex history, but IMHO has never really been worth their current values. In that range I'd take a vintage Sub or GMT, or a 114270 and still have some money left for another watch. Just my 2 cents.

Ha...funny Frills. While an Explorer was involved in climbing Everest, it wasn't a 1016 (hadn't been produced yet). Also, while an Explorer is the watch in the Bond novels, I'm not sure if he specified a particular model of Explorer or if he just described a Rolex that most believe was an Explorer. The 1016 is a nice watch, and its probably the vintage Explorer most people think of when you say vintage Explorer, but I don't see the 1016 itself as having lots of historic things associated with it.

See? Told you Dino would weigh in more comprehensively.

What I wanted to say was that all of the associations with the 1016 is necessarily correct or historically accurate - only that such perceived associations may serve to pump up the secondary market price of the piece.

For example, Cleav's post below from Hodinkee associates the 1016 with Edmund Hillary (because he apparently owned one)...

Frills and. Dino

Great reading, many thanks for taking the time

I found this info link to an auction, if you're interested, good read in conjunction with your fascinating poast Dino. You're the man

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/2010/1...watch-collection-a-chance-to-own-the-ori.html

... even though this other Hodinkee article clarifies that it wasn't a "Rolex Explorer" that the Everest team likely brought with them to the summit (article from just two weeks ago):

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/found-...o-the-peak-of-mount-everest-live-pics-details

In the meantime, you've got pieces like this dating a "Rolex Explorer" to have been manufactured as early as 1950, an entire article with several chapters trying to figure out what Hillary actually brought with him:

http://rolexblog.blogspot.com/1998/06/complete-history-of-rolex-conquering_9473.html

Even though it's clearly not the 1016 that most people associate with the "Rolex Explorer" look these days.

After Dino's note above, I don't know whether to completely write off this joker's piece from a NAWCC publication in mid-2009 about how he found "the original James Bond watch" - which the author claims is a 1016:

http://commanderbond.net/9641/how-i-found-the-original-james-bond-watch.html

So what's the truth? Who knows. What I do think is that correct or not there are stories swirling around about the 1016 out there, maybe explaining its inflated price in the secondary market.

Footnote: I myself went for a 114270 so I don't personally place any premium on the 1016, but this ain't the first time that secondary market prices have disagreed with me!

 

[Dino944]

Frills and. Dino

Great reading, many thanks for taking the time

I found this info link to an auction, if you're interested, good read in conjunction with your fascinating poast Dino. You're the man

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/2010/1...watch-collection-a-chance-to-own-the-ori.html

Thanks Cleav

dino, great info, thanks! ours is from late 60s early 70s iirc.

I was basing my guess on the watch's age using the box in the background of your photos. If that's the box it arrived in, and the watch is actually from the 1960s or 1970s that's not a period correct box. That box is consistent with maybe very late 1980s (at the earliest) through the mid 1990s.

 

[Dino944]

What I wanted to say was that all of the associations with the 1016 is necessarily correct or historically accurate - only that such perceived associations may serve to pump up the secondary market price of the piece.

So what's the truth? Who knows. What I do think is that correct or not there are stories swirling around about the 1016 out there, maybe explaining its inflated price in the secondary market.

Footnote: I myself went for a 114270 so I don't personally place any premium on the 1016, but this ain't the first time that secondary market prices have disagreed with me!

Yes, I think that when people say Explorer particularly vintage Explorer people think 1016, regardless of whether a 1016 was the Explorer used.

I think these associations do pump up the values, but that's not uncommon in the watch world. I've seen people selling new Pateks, VCs, and other brands talking about what the vintage pieces are selling for at auction, and then using it to justify the MSRP or why they can give a minimal discount...because this watch could also shoot up in value. Its entertaining, however, the SAs rarely tell the people that the vintage watches were made in smaller numbers than their modern counterparts and because people wore them and sometimes damaged or lost them, LNIB pieces from the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s etc are rare...as people didn't just take a watch and put it in a safe and wait 10-15 years to see what happens (people do that today, so it won't be as tough to get a LNIB modern grand complication VC in say 15 years or so).

Funny thing is when the 1016s were new they didn't seem all that sought after, most people wanted Subs and GMTs, and I think sometimes once values go up...then people all of the sudden become interested in models that previously flew under their radar.

When I bought an Explorer back in 2002, I made the same choice and went for a 114270. I liked the solid end links of the bracelet and the wg outlines around the hour markers and Arabic numerals.

 

[in stitches]



I've gone much longer 

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

thats what she said


i am sorry, i could not resist


that what she said!

I was basing my guess on the watch's age using the box in the background of your photos.  If that's the box it arrived in, and the watch is actually from the 1960s or 1970s that's not a period correct box.  That box is consistent with maybe very late 1980s (at the earliest) through the mid 1990s.

that box is storing a run of the mill midsize oyster date from the 90s, was just a prop in the pic, as we dont have the box for the 1016. sorry for the confusion.

 

[Dino944]

thats what she said


i am sorry, i could not resist


that what she said!
that box is storing a run of the mill midsize oyster date from the 90s, was just a prop in the pic, as we dont have the box for the 1016. sorry for the confusion.

Stitchy, if that's what she said...who am I to complain! I'm da maaannnn!

Ah, thanks for clarifying the box issue. I thought you were displaying that the watch came with the box and papers that it was delivered in by the prior owner. I knew that box was wrong, if you were saying the watch was any earlier than the very late 80s.

 

[in stitches]

 

[TC (Houston)]

Here's some SF OCD for you guys. I usually clean our Rolexes with a baby toothbrush (super soft) and dish soap. I haven't noticed any adverse effects in 10+ years. The dealer recommended that I *not* use any sort of brush on the AP as the finish is more delicate. I'm thinking of getting a jewelry steam cleaner for the house, which would be great for my wife's jewelry and also nice for the AP bracelet. Thoughts?

 

[in stitches]

They are not terribly expensive, and they're kind of cool to have around. But I think that you'll get much more use out of it for jewelry then you will for watch cleaning.

For watches, I find that the best thing that it does is get in between the links and into the lugs to knock out dirt and grime and whatnot.