How do you feel about Rolex watches?
Discussion
I finally got a new Sub ceramic after waiting (and saving) for thirty years back at the end of October. It hasn't been off my wrist since. It's not like I haven't got other nice watches as I have several Breitlings and Omegas as well as thirty other watches. But the Rolex just feels "right".
It wears really nicely, lovely size, brilliant bracelet and the new clasp is perfect and so easily adjustable. Quality feels great, better than the other watches in my collection and timekeeping is great - less than 1 second a day.
It is everything I hoped it would be and I wouldn't be without it.
It wears really nicely, lovely size, brilliant bracelet and the new clasp is perfect and so easily adjustable. Quality feels great, better than the other watches in my collection and timekeeping is great - less than 1 second a day.
It is everything I hoped it would be and I wouldn't be without it.
An interesting question, because my views on them have changed over the last year or so.
Previously I was largely 'meh' about them - just didn't get the appeal and the brand felt like it had too many 'look at me' connotations about it.
There are still various models I don't like - Daytonas for example - but I have definitely come to appreciate the timelessness of a nice Submariner, as well as watches like the Milgauss. I think in no small part due to the fact that various people have been posting pictures of very nice vintage pieces, some of which I prefer to newer models.
I'm not sure I'd ever get round to owning one - I've already got my eye on a 'birth year' watch for my 50th, but it's likely to be a Heuer or maybe another Breitling - but I no longer actively feel as though I wouldn't want one.
Previously I was largely 'meh' about them - just didn't get the appeal and the brand felt like it had too many 'look at me' connotations about it.
There are still various models I don't like - Daytonas for example - but I have definitely come to appreciate the timelessness of a nice Submariner, as well as watches like the Milgauss. I think in no small part due to the fact that various people have been posting pictures of very nice vintage pieces, some of which I prefer to newer models.
I'm not sure I'd ever get round to owning one - I've already got my eye on a 'birth year' watch for my 50th, but it's likely to be a Heuer or maybe another Breitling - but I no longer actively feel as though I wouldn't want one.
Mixed feelings, but warming to them...
I hate the cyclops on some Rolex. It just seems a naff, crappy way of making the date window larger. I just can't abide them - ruins the look IMO.
I always liked the look of the Milgauss, and the basic shape of the Deepsea - but as above I've never warmed to a Sub due to the cyclops.
However, I bought a Tudor last year and now I'm starting to "get" Rolex. I love the solidity and the weight... but I look at the prices and think I'd rather have an IWC.
I hate the cyclops on some Rolex. It just seems a naff, crappy way of making the date window larger. I just can't abide them - ruins the look IMO.
I always liked the look of the Milgauss, and the basic shape of the Deepsea - but as above I've never warmed to a Sub due to the cyclops.
However, I bought a Tudor last year and now I'm starting to "get" Rolex. I love the solidity and the weight... but I look at the prices and think I'd rather have an IWC.
I have wildly mixed feelings about Rolex.
Yes: Milgauss
Yes: 16600 Seadweller
Yes: No-date Sub
Yes: Air King/Oysterdate (but not until I'm over 60)
No: Daytona (ugh)
No: Deep Sea (too fat, the bracelet is completely inadequate versus the body, rolexrolexrolex original gas escape valve etc)
No: Yachtmaster
No: GMT Explorer
No: Any bi-metal or blue/gold combos
I share Podie's distaste for the cyclops and further don't like the fact that it's a black-on-white date wheel with a black face, a lot of the time. Looks incongruous to me.
I think the prices are excessive compared to other brands in the same price bracket. Five large for a mass-produced steel diver? There's only so much "heritage" and "fit and finish" you can exploit, manufacture movement or no, before it just looks like milking the brand.
There's almost certainly a 16600 in my future, though.
Yes: Milgauss
Yes: 16600 Seadweller
Yes: No-date Sub
Yes: Air King/Oysterdate (but not until I'm over 60)
No: Daytona (ugh)
No: Deep Sea (too fat, the bracelet is completely inadequate versus the body, rolexrolexrolex original gas escape valve etc)
No: Yachtmaster
No: GMT Explorer
No: Any bi-metal or blue/gold combos
I share Podie's distaste for the cyclops and further don't like the fact that it's a black-on-white date wheel with a black face, a lot of the time. Looks incongruous to me.
I think the prices are excessive compared to other brands in the same price bracket. Five large for a mass-produced steel diver? There's only so much "heritage" and "fit and finish" you can exploit, manufacture movement or no, before it just looks like milking the brand.
There's almost certainly a 16600 in my future, though.
CommanderJameson said:
Yes: Milgauss
Yes: 16600 Seadweller
Yes: No-date Sub
Yes: Air King/Oysterdate (but not until I'm over 60)
No: Daytona (ugh)
No: Deep Sea (too fat, the bracelet is completely inadequate versus the body, rolexrolexrolex original gas escape valve etc)
No: Yachtmaster
No: GMT Explorer
No: Any bi-metal or blue/gold combos
This. The cyclops is just terrible.Yes: 16600 Seadweller
Yes: No-date Sub
Yes: Air King/Oysterdate (but not until I'm over 60)
No: Daytona (ugh)
No: Deep Sea (too fat, the bracelet is completely inadequate versus the body, rolexrolexrolex original gas escape valve etc)
No: Yachtmaster
No: GMT Explorer
No: Any bi-metal or blue/gold combos
Their advertising I see seems to be all golf and tennis, neither of which I play or identify with. They seem to be the default choice for people who don't care about watches but want to drop £3k+ at the jewellers for something that other people will KNOW is an expensive watch. Despite the fact that there are millions of fake ones everywhere.
The ones I've played with seemed nice, but 10x nicer than a Steinhart? Nope.
I'd love a Milgauss or a classic standard Rolex (Submariner? I really don't know my Rolex models) but I simply can't identify with them and I can't believe how much they cost. Doubtful I'll ever own one. Some of the newer stuff is so grotesque I can't believe that people would actually pay money for some of it (e.g Skydweller).
I also don't get the fanatical enthusiasm they seem to garner - and love how manufacturing defects with them end up becoming rarities / selling points.. you couldn't make it up!
I also don't get the fanatical enthusiasm they seem to garner - and love how manufacturing defects with them end up becoming rarities / selling points.. you couldn't make it up!
1973 Sea Dweller please, don't care for the double reds, hidden in a SAS operatives bum for 2yrs special 100k price nonsense . .
Vintage good, modern bad in general, except the Milgauss and Air King.
I also agree with the cyclops comments from the man Podie, spot on. What a great way to ruin the look of a watch, lets add something to the crystal that distorts the face of the watch, it just detracts from it for me.
A family friend who has a Deep Sea and on his skinny wrist it's hilarious, he has to walk a certain way to sustain the weight and his arm is definitely developing bigger muscles versus his other, great engineering, but as big a lump as I am I don't think I couldn carry that off.
As for yellow gold tool watches, why? Just why? It's a tool watch, it's designed for a purpose, so why have it made in gold, which for me at least flies in the face of the design principle of the watch. A datejust in gold I get, I dislike, but I get, but tool watches in gold, sorry, just seems one upmanship and too second hand car dealer . . Although that's generally the same for any diver watch for me, a dislike not solely reserved for Rolex.
It's a good job we all like different things, but modern Rolex in most cases leave me cold, however I get the attraction and the vintage divers are appealling. It is a design classic and has the engineering back up, if not the innovation and delicacy of a Glashutte, JLC etc . .
Vintage good, modern bad in general, except the Milgauss and Air King.
I also agree with the cyclops comments from the man Podie, spot on. What a great way to ruin the look of a watch, lets add something to the crystal that distorts the face of the watch, it just detracts from it for me.
A family friend who has a Deep Sea and on his skinny wrist it's hilarious, he has to walk a certain way to sustain the weight and his arm is definitely developing bigger muscles versus his other, great engineering, but as big a lump as I am I don't think I couldn carry that off.
As for yellow gold tool watches, why? Just why? It's a tool watch, it's designed for a purpose, so why have it made in gold, which for me at least flies in the face of the design principle of the watch. A datejust in gold I get, I dislike, but I get, but tool watches in gold, sorry, just seems one upmanship and too second hand car dealer . . Although that's generally the same for any diver watch for me, a dislike not solely reserved for Rolex.
It's a good job we all like different things, but modern Rolex in most cases leave me cold, however I get the attraction and the vintage divers are appealling. It is a design classic and has the engineering back up, if not the innovation and delicacy of a Glashutte, JLC etc . .
I've always thought they were a bit like BMW... Something you might aspire to when you're a teenager or if the budget won't stretch.
They stamp them out in their thousands, the exact number is hard to establish as it clearly detracts from the image.
But obviously they're hugely popular, massively in fact. Just like BMW.
This won't be a popular view.
They stamp them out in their thousands, the exact number is hard to establish as it clearly detracts from the image.
But obviously they're hugely popular, massively in fact. Just like BMW.
This won't be a popular view.
See my recent musings on a newly purchased Milgauss GV in the yearly Wrist Check thread for what I think of them on my particular wrist; but in general I think they make some beautiful, beautiful watches (and some absolute shockers too) - however I think that most of us would agree this to be the same for many watch brands out there. Of all the watches in my (modest) collection, which includes a number of 'nice' modern pieces and some older things from my youth and inherited from my father, the Milgauss just feels so much of a quality piece, even amongst watches worth five times that of the GV, one would find it difficult to argue that Rolex make some very good quality, lasting, popular timepieces.
Oh and on the price thing, some are crazy I accept but I think some are really quite reasonable, given the outrageous prices charged by people like 'Tag' - I was looking at a friends Aquaracer the other day when contemplating one for a general workhorse but it felt so flimsy and cheap I don't think I'd pay half the list price!
Oh and on the price thing, some are crazy I accept but I think some are really quite reasonable, given the outrageous prices charged by people like 'Tag' - I was looking at a friends Aquaracer the other day when contemplating one for a general workhorse but it felt so flimsy and cheap I don't think I'd pay half the list price!
I think they are still the king of wrist wear for people who want to wear a watch that EVERYONE knows is expensive. Because of their huge production numbers (I believe they make more units than Breitling and Omega) they only maintain exclusivity by way of high prices. The current models do, I believe, represent better value relative to other brands than they used to. The new models feel way better made than before - the bracelets used to be terrible but are now great. And the movements are much better.
The problem with them style wise is I think due to them not coming up with anything new, just updating existing models, so they are bound to upset the Rolex faithful and there are bound to be compromises. Like the Explorer 1 with it's new 39mm case, but hands that are too short. The Explorer II with the new mahoosive hands. The GMT with the overbearing bezel. Too much high polish crossing the line making them too jewellery-like.
I am still on the fence about buying - have tried quite a few on. Still considering a Sub or DateJust II. Just put off by the fact that they ARE such an obvious choice, so expensive for something SO mass produced and DO have an image problem.
All of this of course relates to buying new. Used, they are a much better proposition. Sub, Explorer I and II, Milgauss, GMT, DateJusts all good, wearable watches and a reasonably safe place to put your money.
The problem with them style wise is I think due to them not coming up with anything new, just updating existing models, so they are bound to upset the Rolex faithful and there are bound to be compromises. Like the Explorer 1 with it's new 39mm case, but hands that are too short. The Explorer II with the new mahoosive hands. The GMT with the overbearing bezel. Too much high polish crossing the line making them too jewellery-like.
I am still on the fence about buying - have tried quite a few on. Still considering a Sub or DateJust II. Just put off by the fact that they ARE such an obvious choice, so expensive for something SO mass produced and DO have an image problem.
All of this of course relates to buying new. Used, they are a much better proposition. Sub, Explorer I and II, Milgauss, GMT, DateJusts all good, wearable watches and a reasonably safe place to put your money.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff