A thread in two parts...

Based on a bit of forum searching it looks like there are a few forumites who own a "birth year" watch. I've been toying with this idea for a while; I hit a milestone birthday not too long ago, but thought it wasn't worth paying the inflated prices that seem to come about at the same time as such milestones, and am hoping that prices have now moved off a bit.

My first question is, for those who have purchased a birth year watch, how has it lived up to expectations? I'd love to see those watches and how it feels to own something especially tied to that date.

The second part is a bit more particular to my own search and may not interest everyone. For me, my search has broadly that has left me with two options: Omega Speedmaster Professional Moonwatch or Rolex Submariner (no date).

Of the former I already own a modern version and I therefore don't see too much point buying a vintage one. The latter I have had on my general "want to buy" radar for a while, and have in any case been weighing up the choice of either a new one or a more classic vintage model.

So, my second question is, for anyone who has a passing interest or knowledge in Rolex Submariners, what would be your choice?

a) Year of birth submariner (this would be the 5513 in my case)
b) Vintage but a more modern vintage (14060 or 14060M)
c) New (124060)

I'm fine with my Invicta 1953, for about £100

I'm in a similar position, my milestone birthday is this coming week and my thoughts were a Rolex sub or a Speedy. Unfortunately my birth year didn't produce any exciting Speedys and the condition of the few I could find are not great.

I think a Rolex is the better option as it's a timeless design but again, hard to find the correct year, condition etc.

I was looking to get a new Rolex but not keen on the AD games so may put the money towards a few different brands/models instead.

Good luck with your search, I look forward to reading updates!

As it won’t be a daily wear and because I think it’s possibly the best looking Sub of all it is an easy decision.
Factor in that it is actually your birth year and the 5513 is the way to go

I have ended up with watches for both mine and Mrs nbg’s birth years.

Did I set out to buy birth year watches? No.

Do we wear them? Very, very rarely.

Do they have any particular meaning? One does, but not because it is a birth year watch.

Do I get the idea of a birth year watch, invariably bought many years after the event? No not really!

Do I get the idea of buying a (ideally) new watch, on the day (but certainly within the month) of an event that I want to mark? Yes, absolutely. I have a few in that category.

Our birth year watches…

A vintage Omega Seamaster (not a diver) that I bought to wear to our youngest daughter’s wedding. Yes I had numerous other watches, but I wanted to wear something understated and didn’t think that a RG Reverso GR, or any other watches I owned were suitable. On reflection I did have a couple that were suitable, but wanted an excuse to buy a vintage watch. The fact that it was my wife’s birth year wasn’t planned.

Mine is a Tudor Advisor. A chance purchase from a dealer friend, at a time when I was buying watches randomly.

As to the Submariner?

You already have a number of modern Subs and SDs. I therefore figure that had you preferred the older models you would have bought one, long before now.

Neil

I don't think I'm going to be of much help to you Michael as;-

1. I don't own a birth year watch, nor do I especially subscribe to the notion of owning one. I do, though, own a watch that belonged to my Granfather, on my Father's side, that +/- a couple of years would count, and

2. I've briefly owned a Speedmaster Moonwatch (Hesalite / 1861 movement) some years back but sold it to put the funds to something else. As to a Rolex Submariner? I have no special knowledge or interest in one.

Sorry.

Guy

Sent from my Galaxy S23 Ultra using Tapatalk

I have a birth year watch, A 1680 sub from, let say the 70's haha! I've worn it a lot over the years and it's been a really great watch, I got it for my 40th birthday (which doing the maths is a long time ago now). I think what holds me back wearing it more these days is that I can only really wear it when at home. Going down to London, or in and around the city, just seems to dangerous now given the amount of watch theft. However I comfortably wear the watch in and around County Durham. It was a present for many 40th (so I didn't choose it), and in fact was a 40th birthday present from my now ex-wife. So it's impressive that it's survived in the collection given I am now re-married! Unfortunately it just never gets pulled out on my actual birthday (the DJ she bought me for my 50th is that one that comes out then - even though that is not a birth watch!)

Nothing quite so exalted as you are aiming for, Michael. But I do have two. I picked up the gent’s watch on the left a few years ago. It’s only 32 mm, fairly normal for the 1950s, but it shows how tiny the other one is. That is my birthDAY watch, as it was given to my mother by my father on the day I was born. She gave it to me a few years before she died, along with a similar sized Rotary that dad gave to her for their 20th wedding anniversary. She said they were both broken but I got a local watchmaker to fix them up and get them running, and gave them back to her as a surprise Christmas present. She was very moved to know that they were still working, but she insisted I keep them as she could no longer tell the time on them anyway.

Thanks everyone. As my original post had perhaps given away, I'm not 100% decided on whether I like or not the idea of the birth year watch purchased after the fact. It's a bit like those old gift CDs that have music from your birth year; music from an era you didn't actually grow up in.

But, as @stefs points out, the vintage no-date Submariners are well regarded so I was considering one anyway, and thought maybe if the two things coincided it might be quite nice. Hence, to your point @nbg, the reason for now considering a vintage despite having some newer models.

Thankfully for Baby TB we bought a watch the month after her birth, so she won't have this problem.

Late to the party, Michael, sorry. I did a little research based on the ref No you gave (5513) and some interesting stuff came to light. I could be corrected by those better placed to know about the brand (I've never owned one), but I think the following tidbits should prove largely correct.

1) They are a very collectible Sub ref and also the longest running, 1962 to 1989 approx. That gives you the scope to be aged anywhere between 36 and 63 if my shoddy maths holds water. They can be found for around $15k all the way up to six figure sums, birth year and condition dependent.

2) They were the last Sub ref to feature an acrylic glass and not sapphire.

3) Interestingly they seem to feature a bi-directional bezel; imo a deal-breaker for a dive watch.

4) They are not chronometers, where their more expensive predecessor the 5512 was, and do not display the iconic wording superlative chronometer on the dial.

As for a birth year watch for myself, can't say I've ever had the calling. Something bespoke and individual, now you're talking. And, it's a scratch that I went on to itch. Best of luck if you choose to pursue the route, I'd love to see the photos, they are a very appealing watch alright.

Des

Thanks @strapline, it pretty much sums up my knowledge as well. To the fourth bullet, I suppose one of the major decisions for a Submariner buyer is whether you go for a '4-line' or '2-line' Sub. For a vintage one my preference is a 2-line, so despite having a 'worse' movement, the 5513 would be preferred over the 5512.

In the meantime I've registered interest for a new model. I'll probably sit on the decision for a while - plenty of other watches to keep me interested in the meantime - and see how I feel in a few months' time.

@strapline
Des what you have said as far as pricing illustrates the minefield of vintage Rolex. Albeit the top end pricing of a all period correct Milsub version of the 5513 could be north of $100k.

A 5513 was the second Rolex that I almost bought. Price looked ok to me, but the problem was I knew nothing about the pricing differences, that are based on far more than cosmetic condition, which is basically what I was looking at. I realised I would have been daft to buy, without significant research, where it is all about is the watch period correct. I.e. original dial, hands and bezel insert, rather than service replacements.

If I was to buy one, I would only look to buy from one of the dealers, who are themselves vintage Rolex experts and will state exactly what one is buying.

The production run of chronometer spec 5512 and non chronometer 5513 overlapped by about 18 years, giving customers the choice of which they preferred.

Neil

@nbg I was a little dubious commenting on Rolex, Neil, it's most definitely not my ball park. I found the exercise of looking at this ref interesting; the older models are stunning, I'd probably favour the two lines of dial text myself. I have an uncle that recently passed on and he wore a Sub for years, timescale wise it may well be a 5512 or 5513. As his estate was being settled I thought there was a small chance the watch might be offered to me, his only nephew. Naturally enough it went to his son, who is neither a watch enthusiast nor diver. I hope her realises what he has on his wrist and does any restoration and maintenance sympathetically. I'd hate to think he might sell it on for a song or, worse still, resign it to the back of a drawer in his house.

Des

I would also agree on the need to ensure authenticity with such an expensive purchase. I have actually found an example which is certified pre-owned. It doesn't necessarily ensure correct vintage of all the parts, but at least you know that it's not a write-off altogether.

Birth year watch - I have toyed with it but not in a serious way. I wouldn't mind getting a birth year Speedy 145.022. Much easier on the bank than a Rolex. But I wouldn't even say I am kicking the tires. Too many possibilities in front of it.

A tangent but I have toyed with getting a companion to my 1675 year wise. Either a 1665 or a 1680. I almost grabbed a nice wearable 1675 at a really good price but ultimately passed because of other priorities.

I came into watches in the mid 80s so I have a soft spot for the 4 and 5 digit references in Rolex. I find the direction of the new models off putting and too flashy. They don't wear as well to me either but that is probably from wearing my 1675 for decades.

While I wouldn't want to over pay for a reference with service parts it can also be an opportunity for a good deal for a watch that you want to wear and enjoy rather than be a museum/investment piece. Just something to think about.

@nbg A MilSub with the correct bezel is going way north of $100K. Wind Vintage has one listed currently for $375K.