|
|
| Welcome to 3T! Please take the time to register and join in on the friendly,knowledgeable watch talk.Please note that not all registrations will receive an immediate activation e-mail.Those who do not receive an immediate notification will be activated manually within 48hrs. by an admin. without an e-mail activation url sent to you,you may then sign in using your username and password,if you feel there is a problem please e-mail us at timetechtalk@hotmail.com and include your name and username and we activate your account.Thank You! |
| Moderated by: 3T | Page:   1 2 3 |
|
|||||||||||||
| Rolex question | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 11:41 pm |
|
25th Post |
|
OldeCrow 3T WIS 
|
You know James bond gave up his Beretta and his Rolex for a Walther and an Omega. 
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Nov 23rd, 2009 12:02 am |
|
26th Post |
|
IanM 3T WIS 
|
bigrustypig wrote: IanM, you've got a gold Daytona??? Man, I always wanted that and the President but that's several salary grades above me Hiya BRP - yessir. Testing my memory - the Daytona is (I think) a U?? serial, bought in 1998 and the model number is probably a 16509. Better minds can confirm the details, but it is an 18k yellow gold white-faced, white subdials with gold surrounds non-Zenith model (with no diamonds!!). Has sure held its value - its worth more now than when I bought it. Mate, I acknowledge your point about the increased size to 41mm - but I can't say I have ever seen a 41mm President or Datejust in the flesh, yet ;). I have tried on a coupla 42mm Omega Aqua Terras, and they were just about the minimum I would consider to be my taste, these days. I am off to Canberra for this Wed, Thurs and Fri - might get the chance to see the new Rollies there, or will chat with the AD here in Perth on my return, so I can talk about it from experience and not just photos!! Wonder if the bigger Presidents and Datejusts are more "me" than the smaller version, or if I am too used to the 42s. 44s and 45s I wear now?? Will let ya know! Cheers guys - let the debate rage on! IanM hand6.gif
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Nov 23rd, 2009 01:38 pm |
|
27th Post |
|
apeogre 3T WIS 
|
I love where this discussion is going! BRP, why would you suggest the sub with date as opposed to the Sea-dweller? Note, I can't see myself buying a dssd. I have the bubble on my Boschett RR and I gotta say, I'm not a super fan of the bubble. Love the watch but the bubble kind of distracts from the fantastic blue face. I talked to my AD and he said that apparently Rolex will remove the bubble for me, however, it would probably leave a small right. I'm guessing in the AR coating. I'm not really a fan of having a ring on my crystal. Hence why I'm thinking that the SD would be a good choice. Does anyone here have a SD? I'm curious to see their thoughts on it, especially compared to the Sub. Ian, I'd love to see a shot of your Gold Daytona!!! Maybe next to the res of your subs??? Please?  I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one here who'd like to see it. And please don't forget your camera when you go to get the info on any new models on the horizon.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Mon Nov 23rd, 2009 10:02 pm |
|
28th Post |
|
aujang 3T WIS 
|
apeogre wrote: I love where this discussion is going! At 40mm the Sub is the smallest watch in my "family" and it is dwarfed by its larger siblings. Is it a problem? Absolutely not. You should know, however, that contrary to what your AD has told you, Rolex will not remove the cyclops on the crystal. Also if you send your Sub in to RSC for service without the cyclops Rolex will replace the crystal or it will not service the watch. 
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 25th, 2009 07:56 pm |
|
29th Post |
|
apeogre 3T WIS
|
aujang, that Rolex seems a little out of place in that photo.
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Nov 26th, 2009 12:42 am |
|
30th Post |
|
lincolnunit 3T WIS 
|
I too have been kicking around a Deep Sea Dweller, but can't seem to abide the pricing. At least it will be the most expensive I've bought at this point. I have a Yachtmaster and TT Sub, and even owned an Explorer II, but got rid of it as it fit too small for me. Then I went and wore one of my Renato divers and MAN WHAT A 'HONKER!!! To be truthful, I've been rotating two of my Seamasters (which I thought were massive at one time, but not compared with some of my wrist tanks) and the Rolex's. Trying to convince myself to pop the tire of a purchase of a DSD already. Since the size and heft are more in line with what would fit with my wrist. But the holidays and my nagging conscience....!
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Nov 26th, 2009 01:14 am |
|
31st Post |
|
bigrustypig 3T WIS 
|
Apeogre, to answer your question and just my opinion, I would recommend a Sub or any watch with a cyclops over the date because it makes reading the date easier. When you get to the stage, like me, where you have less head hair and women don't notice you anymore, the eyesight goes away fast and reading a tiny date window will be hard without a cyclops. The other issue really is having a watch with a date. It is simply my preference to have this convenience of knowing the date whenever I have to. With so many details and numbers in my daily life, knowing the date in a flash helps tons. Since I try to shake and wind all my unused watches every day, having a correct date confirms to me that the watch has had its daily "workout....and the rotor and spring can relax. Also, if you want to re-sell the watch with a date or with a cyclops, you will have a bigger secondary market if the watch has a date or date with cyclops. I have to agree with Augang. Your AD may have erred in saying Rolex will take away the cyclops. It simply can't be perfectly and technically done. The cyclops is part of the glass dropping/forming operation of Rolex in its glass plant and erasing it is absurd, in my opinion. What he may have meant was that the Sub's glass with the cyclops MAY be retrofitted with another crystal from a Sea Dweller. But this is where your problem starts: Rolex will never accept your "modified" Sub with that cyclops-free crystal. Try putting a stainless steel Jubillee bracelet on your 2-tone DateJust and watch how quickly the pretty Rolex customer service assistant will push the watch back to you. Plain and simple: changing the original....it's a no-no. I may be a purist on this and the only watches I MAY consider playing around with are my cheaper Seikos....but even then, I still have to muster the flair to do so. Augang, I love your collection, amigo! hand6.gifhand6.gifhand6.gif Hope this helps, Apeogre.;)
|
||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Nov 27th, 2009 09:38 pm |
|
32nd Post |
|
aujang 3T WIS
|
apeogre wrote: aujang, that Rolex seems a little out of place in that photo. Yes, one of these watches is not like the others :)
|
|||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Current time is 06:55 am | Page: 1 2 3 |
| TimeTechTalk.com > Time Tech Talk > Time Talk > Rolex question | Top |
. Those babies really rock!