OK, so here's an interesting one. I was watching the Rolex portion of the JH auction today. This got me interested in checking out the early-early eighties Oyster Perpetual Date that I inherited in 2008. I wanted to find out the difference between Oyster Datejust and Oyster Date, specifically. I was able to find the perfect article to find out the info I desired. It was very interesting. What’s the Difference? The Rolex Men’s Datejust Vs. The Rolex Men’s Date My mother purchased the watch for my dad, new in early December 1983, from a large jeweler who is still in business, and who presently will remain nameless. But they are one of the big mall operators that has been around for many years, and still is in business. My parents, not being watch people at all, just knew it was a Rolex in SS. I asked my mom if she remembers having a box for it. She didn't remember, but was pretty sure it came in a box. After all, she had gift wrapped it for Xmas '83. That box was either tossed or the jeweler gave her a standard gift-box and sent her on her way. I know that might sound farfetched and paranoid, but read on, as it gets more interesting, and damning, IMHO. I found the registration that my parents got with the watch, along with the owner's manual and the green Rolex envelope that they are kept in. My parents never had any other Rolex watch. My dad's previous watch was an automatic Wittnauer, and my mom never had anything than a Wittnauer, which she lost, as well as Timex stuff. As I read the article, I read with interest that it was in 1983 that Rolex changed to a movement with a quick-set feature. My dad's watch is a "Date", without quick-set. I find that interesting. I mean, it was purchased at the very end of '83, yet it did not have the '83 feature. I then noticed that the certificate, which was filled out by my dad, in his printing, had a serial number in the 719**** range. However, the folded card shows a different number that is in the 783**** range, which would seem to indicate a quick-set model. It also had another number that showed it was in the 15,000A series. According the article, the 15,000 range should have a quick-set date on it. Was my mom taken advantage of? I say probably so, but gave a little benefit of the doubt to the jeweler on that one. But no matter what, something was not right. They weren't buying from a guy on a the corner in a trench-coat. The benefit of the doubt I gave this large jeweler wore much thinner as I noticed that the owner's manual that came with the watch gave instructions for a non-quick-set model. That was strange, being that if it was a paperwork mix-up, one would think that the envelope that contained the instructions, as well as a different, and later, serial number, would have had an owner's manual that instructed on how to use the quick-set. Of course, the actual watch does not have this feature. If they had been given the instruction book that mentioned the quick-set, they would realize that something was wrong with the paperwork, despite not being watch people, right? I mean, they were not stupid. Just not watch people. I'll have to wait until I get to the bank to get the watch so I can check the serial number. Admittedly, I have very limited experience with Rolexes. But if the Beckertime article is correct that 15000 series watches should have the quick-set, then I'm pretty sure they were taken, and rather fraudulently. I'm guessing that the salesperson knew my mom knew nothing, that they could pass last year's model off on her and never be discovered. She told me that she just paid what they asked, and nobody ever explained a difference or offered a discount for a discontinued model. So what say the Rolex experts about such a scenario. Many thanks, ahead of time. Cheers.