Rolex Daytona

[Frank Furter]

I'm after a bit of advice please chaps. I don't often post in the watch section of PH, but I am an avid reader.

I currently own a 2010 Rolex Submariner Ceramic which I wear daily, however I am now getting the itch for a Daytona. I bought the Sub C very well at the time, and seem to be able to achieve c.£4.5K for it if I were to sell now. I've noticed that Daytona's seemed to have dropped in price a little in recent months, and as such they are now becoming very appealing as a next ownership prospect.

Whilst I'm confident in a Sub's ability to more or less hold it's value, I'm not so comfortable that the same could be said for a Daytona. Am I completely wrong in this?

I'm not expecting to make any money on any watch, but the comfort of the residuals holding relatively steady over a period of years is a nice thing IMO.

If I were to purchase a full set c.2008/9/10 Daytona now for around the £7,500 mark, is it's value likely to remain relatively stable over the next couple of years?

As I said earlier, I'm an avid reader of the PH watch forum, and was a little unnerved to read various comments regarding the Daytona "price bubble" bursting etc. Have they simply reduced in S/H price somewhat due to them no longer being incredibly difficult to get hold of? Is this set to continue or can it be viewed as a blip in a generally speaking slow & gradual value appreciation curve? I'm not seeking to make money on any watch I buy, but the initial appeal of steel Rolex's to me years ago was the fact they hold value, and generally appreciate very slowly over time.

Watchfinders pricing on Daytona's is thoroughly confusing also. They have this lovely 2007 model up for £7,450 with box & papers:

http://www.watchfinder.co.uk/Rolex/Daytona/116520/...

But then this 2011 model (again in white, w.box & papers) for a mere £200 more:

http://www.watchfinder.co.uk/Rolex/Daytona/116520/...

Why would anyone choose the older model for the sake of £200?

I'm struggling to appreciate any real differences in the various years models. Can anyone shine any light on this?

Also, if anyone has made the move from Sub to Daytona I'd like to hear whether you were pleased you made the change.

Apologies for the slightly rambled post, I would simply welcome other peoples view on the points I've mentioned.

[mrdemon]

in their sale they were up for £6.5k inc box and papers.

here is one for £6.9k

http://www.watchclub.com/w6426/rolex-cosmograph-da...

but then as you say you can pay £8k

[westberks]

I'd suggest you get and try one on (if you haven't already) as they wear quite small for a 40mm. you might find it feels a bit light on the wrist after a ceramic Sub.

i do wonder if Rolex have a revised Daytona up their sleeve at some point as they've upsized the Explorer and DSSD and ceramic'd the sub and GMT. if they do similar with the Daytona it may effect the prices a little bit, but they have always held value well; just been increased in cost so much that there is no point buying to flip anymore. also plenty of second hand stock so not in as much demand.

Edited by westberks on Wednesday 19th February 14:56

[andy tims]

A Daytona will have higher serving costs. Probably not a deal breaker, but as a daily wearer, worth at least considering.

[Zingari]

Can you live without a date function on your watch? I cant which is the only reservation for me.

Also having worn a sub for 20yrs the other sports watches seem too small. I bought an early ExpII to try it out. Wife wore it more than me and when I can remember where I put it I need to move it on.

I suspect next generation Daytona may have a date function as they are way behind the curve in relation to other Chronos

[Frank Furter]

Thanks for the comments chaps.

I'm interested to hear how it may feel small compared to a submariner on the wrist, are they not slightly bigger if anything?

[Frank Furter]

Zingari said:

Can you live without a date function on your watch? I cant which is the only reservation for me.

Also having worn a sub for 20yrs the other sports watches seem too small. I bought an early ExpII to try it out. Wife wore it more than me and when I can remember where I put it I need to move it on.

I suspect next generation Daytona may have a date function as they are way behind the curve in relation to other Chronos

A 40mm watch is the smallest I could live with, and I don't have particularly large wrists.

The lack of date is a downside to be frank, as I do constantly refer to the sub multiple times daily, however it's a small price to pay IMO.

[DH01]

Frank Furter said:

Thanks for the comments chaps.

I'm interested to hear how it may feel small compared to a submariner on the wrist, are they not slightly bigger if anything?

I wore a Sub daily for 3 or 4 years then bought a Daytona.
Have now worn the Daytona daily for 3 or 4 years. Initially the lack of date can be a nuisance but no more than that .
It's certainly no worse than a non date Sub or a Speedmaster and no one bleats on about them not having a date !
I would probably never move back to a Sub as I much prefer the fact that the Daytona has a much lower profile on the wrist.
I found that the Sub collected digs and dinks regularly , the Daytona suffers much much less as it sit so much lower.

I'd say that the Daytona feels quite a bit smaller and that is a positive in everyday use.

[Frank Furter]

DH01 said:

I wore a Sub daily for 3 or 4 years then bought a Daytona.
Have now worn the Daytona daily for 3 or 4 years. Initially the lack of date can be a nuisance but no more than that .
It's certainly no worse than a non date Sub or a Speedmaster and no one bleats on about them not having a date !
I would probably never move back to a Sub as I much prefer the fact that the Daytona has a much lower profile on the wrist.
I found that the Sub collected digs and dinks regularly , the Daytona suffers much much less as it sit so much lower.

I'd say that the Daytona feels quite a bit smaller and that is a positive in everyday use.

That's good to hear, thanks.

Are the Daytonas noticeably thinner than the Subs then? Do you not find that the polished outer bezel is very susceptible to picking up light scratches etc though?

[dom9]

If the next generation Daytona has a date, I may have to take a look at one...

Always wanted one until my ND Sub taught me I couldn't go without a date.

If the next one is 41-42mm, ceramic bezel and has a date (all seem quite likely) then I suspect I'll be in the market!

[chris56]

Having both Submariner and Daytona, (and in fact multiple versions of both) I find that the Daytona wears small on your wrist in comparison to a Submariner. Legibility of the Sub is better than the Daytona - the Daytona dial is quite cluttered. So for telling the time at a glance the Sub is better. Lume is much better on the Sub.
The Stainless steel bezel of the Daytona picks up scratches and scuff marks easily (even more so if the bezel is gold). It is not easy to polish out scuffs and scratches as the numerals on the Daytona bezel are painted and polishing the bezel removes the paint. The only real cure for a badly scratched bezel is a new bezel - expensive. The Sub does not suffer the same issue although the ceramic bezels can break.
Equally the polished centre links on the Daytona bracelet show scratches and scuffs whereas the brushed bracelet links of the Submariner do not.
As others have mentioned the Sub can be had with a Date.
Clearly, the Daytona has chronograph but again the cluttered dial makes use and legibility compromised.

Edited by chris56 on Wednesday 19th February 20:03

[Frank Furter]

Thanks for all the comments chaps, much appreciated to hear the views of a few owners.

Having tried one on locally today, I've sourced a 2011 white dial full set Daytona and chopped in the Sub C.

Will chuck a picture of the Daytona up in the incoming thread in the next few days, although I'm sure you all know what one looks like.

[ILOVEWATCHES]

DH01 said:

I wore a Sub daily for 3 or 4 years then bought a Daytona.
Have now worn the Daytona daily for 3 or 4 years. Initially the lack of date can be a nuisance but no more than that .
It's certainly no worse than a non date Sub or a Speedmaster and no one bleats on about them not having a date !
I would probably never move back to a Sub as I much prefer the fact that the Daytona has a much lower profile on the wrist.
I found that the Sub collected digs and dinks regularly , the Daytona suffers much much less as it sit so much lower.

I'd say that the Daytona feels quite a bit smaller and that is a positive in everyday use.

I think this perfectly sums it up. I personally prefer a watch with a date so my daily is my sub but the thinner base of the daytona does sit better personally on my wrist but do however dream that rolex would one day put a date into the watch. I can only dream

P

[yeti]

Frank Furter said:

I'm interested to hear how it may feel small compared to a submariner on the wrist, are they not slightly bigger if anything?

It's all about the bezel to dial ratio; the Daytona has a very small dial area with a lot of detail on it and a big shiny bezel (which as mentioned, cannot be polished when scratched). It looks and feels very small on the wrist compared to most 40mm pieces.

It's very slim as well, the Sub is taller.

Andy's point on servicing; I think RSC chagre about £200 more, so that's 200 quid every 5-10 years. Shouldn't be a deal breaker.

Private minters change hands at 6.5k nowadays and there is no waiting list at dealers. Yes, the bubble has burst, they are simply not as desirable as they used to be.

[Sadface]

andy tims said:

A Daytona will have higher serving costs. Probably not a deal breaker, but as a daily wearer, worth at least considering.

As I have just found out, I bought a unworn ss Daytona around 7 years ago and has recently let me down , it's currently geting repaired at a mind blowing £680

[DH01]

Hard wearing chrono with 70 hour power reserve, will always be a very special piece in horo world, but then you'd need to appreciate its worth not just its value !

[yeti]

Sadface said:

As I have just found out, I bought a unworn ss Daytona around 7 years ago and has recently let me down , it's currently geting repaired at a mind blowing £680

A non-chrono Rolex is 430 quid at the moment, so 250 quid difference every 5-10 years.

Last JLC chrono I had serviced was over 1100 quid. Rolex charges are actually very reasonable! That's high-end watches for you

[Maxf]

The daytona bezel can be polished - perhaps not on a polishing wheel, but certainly with a cape cod cloth, which will remove casual scratches, although not dinks or deep gouges.

I would assume a daytona will about hold its value if you buy it no higher than £7k - I paid something like £6,200 for mine, which I would assume I would get back, although wouldnt make much on. Gut instinct is that even newer ones will settle at around £7k and for a quick sale might go for a bit less.

I have a (non ceramic) Sub too, and wouldnt assume I'd have made much on that either over the past couple of years as they seem to have stayed fairly static at about £3,300 for the non-date.

Actually - even buying second hand, I dont think I would turn a profit on any of my watches (although wouldnt use) - maybe I'm buying wrong!

[yeti]

Maxf said:

The daytona bezel can be polished - perhaps not on a polishing wheel, but certainly with a cape cod cloth, which will remove casual scratches, although not dinks or deep gouges.

Well... yeah, obviously you can use a cloth on it to remove surface marks!

But on a polishing wheel, nothing at all.

[jonny70]

yeti said:

A non-chrono Rolex is 430 quid at the moment, so 250 quid difference every 5-10 years.

Last JLC chrono I had serviced was over 1100 quid. Rolex charges are actually very reasonable! That's high-end watches for you

Im aware of the price of Rolex and Omega servicing (owning them)

but 1100 quid for a JLC chrono service?

How much is there servicing for a reverso or basic master control?

Im really hoping my IWC portuguese chrono wont need a service soon (any ideas how much?)