Reply With QuoteI live in Cheshire not far from Sandbach, PM me if you are ever in the area over a weekend and you are welcome to try out my ocean 2 GMT, simply amazing for the money.Originally Posted by Alessandro
Yes, stop that!... I'm going to try a DSSD at the weekend and see how it goes, if that does not grab my attention I'm giving up on the idea of owning a Rolex for the time being.
I live in Cheshire not far from Sandbach, PM me if you are ever in the area over a weekend and you are welcome to try out my ocean 2 GMT, simply amazing for the money.
Rolex DSSD will be substantial enough for your wrist
It's all about brand, if you don't see the brand, and buy into that, you ain't going to see a few bits of stainless steel worth 5k. A steinhart bracelet and a Rolex one only really differ by brand, how much better can one bracelet be over another...not 5k worth that's for sure.
Not sure what there is to get? Either you like them or you dont! Rolex is the aspirational brand for the majority, the majority of watch searches on the internet focus on just 10 main brands and Rolexs dominates with a 21% share of that, the second most popular search doesnt make double digits! Now this doesnt mean anything but does demonstrate that in the watch world one brand is more sought by quite a margin.
Could be clever marketing or just that they have got it so right in fit, form, & function but the beauty of a watch is what YOU see in it not the masses
RIAC
This.
It would be very sad to buy a Rolex just because of the name and without actually liking the looks of it.
To me looks are nr. 1, in random order followed by quality, price, re-sale value, history.
Some Rolex' i think are awesome, some i would never like to have, all based on looks and this is actually applicable to all brands.
I know what you mean, a few months back I set on getting a sea dweller but when I tried one on at a dealer the bracelet felt really cheap and I could not believe it was a real Rolex. Each to his own as others have said
I have never been drawn to Rolex, but ever since i picked up an old Tudor oysterdate, it has become my favourite watch. I am always tempted to try a Rolex air-king or something simliar, but i am more than happy with my Rolex little brother. I'm not sure how i will bond with a Rolex, i think it is the name that puts me off. Tudor oysterdates rock...
re Steinhart sub hommage ;check out the Davosa Ternos Ceramic - just picked one of these up from fellow TZ'er and I have been v impressed, great bezel, lume & cyclops... Only snag is its got me thinking of the real thing - but the price difference / diminishing returns puts the real deal definitely in Veblen territory !
I feel similar.
I had a good look at a Sub the other day, a friend of mine was bought one as a wedding present.
Can't deny it was a very nice piece, and well made - but tbh, if I ever did buy a Rolex it wouldn't be a Sub, far too recognisable. Even then, I'd probably buy a Tudor. The coin for Rolex these days just far too much, they are nice, but for me, there are plenty of alternatives for a lot less, that are just as nice for me.
The thing about investment as well, how many people kid themselves about it!? So you a buy a nice Rolex telling yourself it won't lose value, but if you're a collector, you've bought that watch because you want it, if you do ever sell it, it will likely be used to buy another one - in which case the investment side of it, is a bit of a moot point.
So to sum up, nice watches but too expensive, I'd happily wear a Tudor! And even then, the prices of those would still make it my best watch, lol!
Does anyone here own a Tudor Pelagos and a sub or exp 2 as I'm drawn to the tudor looks and the price is a lot easier to swallow.. guess I'll have that same issue with size though?
Thanks very much! I'll PM you if I get further than Manchester over a weekend.
i dont like BMWs but I don't beat myself up about it......it's my opinion...simple. You should think the same. Why do you need to "get" Rolex???
I'm with you on the cars and the watch!, I'm going to try a DSSD at the weekend as some people have said i have just not found the right rolex for me, if that ends up being another dead end I'm going to forget the brand and move on. Oddly enough I'm the same with cars. I've owned over 120 of all makes and models but for some reason a VAG group car just "feels right" when I get in them.
I was again in the Rolex AD in Preston yesterday trying to force myself to buy a Rolex but it didn't work out.I have previously has a Sub Date but too small and i only have 7" wrist and couldn't live with the cyclops.
I tried on...
Explorer 1 but can't live without date.
Explorer 11 in white about the nicest fit but again not sure about the cyclops although i did love the watch.
GMT but don't like the polished links.
Sea Dweller was about the nicest looking but sits too high and too heavy and don't start me on the price £8000.
The chap in the shop knows me well as i have bought many watches from him and although i generally find the Omega styling more to my liking i don't like the matt bezel on the current P.O.
I have realized its time to look at other brands and Rolex is not for me but if they ever did a Explorer 1 with a date or a Explorer 11 without a cyclops then i would be the first to buy one.
Its a good job we all like different watches,cars,football teams,men,women and beer otherwise it would be a dull world.
All good points, I'm sure the cyclops can be removed if that's all you don't like about the exp 2?I was again in the Rolex AD in Preston yesterday trying to force myself to buy a Rolex but it didn't work out.I have previously has a Sub Date but too small and i only have 7" wrist and couldn't live with the cyclops.
I tried on...
Explorer 1 but can't live without date.
Explorer 11 in white about the nicest fit but again not sure about the cyclops although i did love the watch.
GMT but don't like the polished links.
Sea Dweller was about the nicest looking but sits too high and too heavy and don't start me on the price £8000.
The chap in the shop knows me well as i have bought many watches from him and although i generally find the Omega styling more to my liking i don't like the matt bezel on the current P.O.
I have realized its time to look at other brands and Rolex is not for me but if they ever did a Explorer 1 with a date or a Explorer 11 without a cyclops then i would be the first to buy one.
Its a good job we all like different watches,cars,football teams,men,women and beer otherwise it would be a dull world.
Maybe that's it, I don't "aspire" to rolex but merely felt I "should" get one as I thought I was missing something BUT my gut tells me I'm really not missing anything. The watches I aspire to these days are well beyond my financial reach and are more like watch porn in reality!Not sure what there is to get? Either you like them or you dont! Rolex is the aspirational brand for the majority, the majority of watch searches on the internet focus on just 10 main brands and Rolexs dominates with a 21% share of that, the second most popular search doesnt make double digits! Now this doesnt mean anything but does demonstrate that in the watch world one brand is more sought by quite a margin.
Could be clever marketing or just that they have got it so right in fit, form, & function but the beauty of a watch is what YOU see in it not the masses
Thats what i did last time with my sub date but not sure i would want to do it a new Rolex Exp 11 at £5500 in case it had to go back too Rolex under warranty etc.
However it certainly is something i would consider in the next twelve months because i love the white face and it so different from most of the Rolex watches.
+1Presumably the smiley is so obvious you missed it off, but if you're serious... Well...
Happy NOT to be a WIS in that case
M.
A
Personal opinion but here goes - the thing that made me 'get' Rolex was the iconic vintage models, and new ones will always be a riff on the vintage templates, to be judged in relation to them. Those older models were smaller and designed to be that way, in an age of smaller watches and probably smaller people too. The recent attempts to make them bigger haven't really worked for me, and some of them now just look like slightly bloated versions of previously classic and skinny icons, like Vegas Elvis or fat Jim Morrison - just not quite right! If you're a sturdy gentleman and a large watch is in proportion for you, a brand that looked best when it was 40 years younger and 36mm may just not be for you. Then again, you'd probably look great in a giant IWC which would look comical on me. There's no need to like them, but they work damn well on my spaghetti wrists!
If you don't like Rolex, you don't like watches. ;)
I do enjoy reading about 1st world problems.
Have to say I am inclined to agree about Rolex but for slightly different reasons.
I have seen a few decent ones on the wrist but most of them being subs and they have never really appealed to me because 1. I am not a diver and even if I was I wouldnt go swimming with a several grand watch and 2. They must be one of the most copied watches on the planet. Their other designs however I do like but seeing them in the flesh to say I was disappointed would be an understatement. Most of the ones sold in the UK seem to be too wide and too thick and just look like big lumps of metal on the wrist. I remember seeing a few in Paris a few years back and dont recall them being so huge so I can only presume Rolex do a mid size watch and then one for people who like a several grand watch that looks like a £70 fashion watch.
No smiley so I'll assume you're serious?, if so:
A) You viewed the thread based on its title and fairly probable subject matter(Rolex was a HUGE clue, no?)
B) It's a watch forum with varied interests and pocket depths to match.
C) Pretty sure I mentioned the investment potential in relation to my daughters education.
D) I'm sure I made it clear I was a working class bloke who works hard for my cash.
Then perhaps you aren't really a true petrol head? I think my point of view on this whole thing must be a bit scewif to most of you guys.
Il try and explain. I think that my not liking the cyclops was because I want used to it. I got used to it and it allowed me to appreciate the watch.
I initially, when listening to Schoenberg's Gurreleder winced. But I got use to it and learned to appreciate it. Its not my favourite, but I have an idea what its all about.
What I'm trying to say, is that for whatever reasons, Rolex have created something that is worth experiencing, through ownership simply for the value of that experience. If you like it, great, if you don't, you will hopefully have something to add to a discussion like this that's not as superficial as "O do t like the cyclops" "the bracelet is tinny" or "I don't like the brand".
I'd never buy a new one. I hasten to add!
The other point that struck a chord with me earlier In the thread was the comment about an investment being a moot point. The investment is till present as long as the value is still present in whatever asset is owned. Money doesn't have to be in a bank earning .5% interest to qualify as an investment or asset.
Last edited by jrpippen; 15th February 2013 at 23:38.
So you can't be a true petrol head if you don't own a Porsche, and you can't be a true wis unless you own a rolex??
I think it's sweet you've bought into the hype....but of course you're completely wrong
I do.
And I'd be tempted to say that the exp II wears a little bit bigger (but flatter of course), but that's subjective I guess.
Both on my 7.5-ish wrist,
Thanks for that, really helpful and has made my mind up that the Pelagius will be another watch that I like to look at but not wear. Been offered a 330ci convertible BMW tonight, might try that instead of another watch!!I do.
And I'd be tempted to say that the exp II wears a little bit bigger (but flatter of course), but that's subjective I guess.
Both on my 7.5-ish wrist,
I totally understand the sentiments of being "underwhelmed" when buying a Rolex, as I have experienced it myself. I like them and would love a vintage GMT and when you now look at current pricing of Omega and Breitling, for example, they are looking like a better value watch. They are still all ridiculously overpriced but my money would be on the Rolex from new, which I can't believe I am actually saying haha.
Whatever you choose mate, just go for it and enjoy it.
It's funny, this thread has me thinking that's there's probably an "optimum wrist size". Clearly, massive watches on 6"ish wrists are going to look a bit comedic to most, but smaller watches do look a bit lost on 8" wrists. My wrists are 6.5-7", so smaller dressy watches look fine, and I feel I can pull off a Fifty Fathoms or 44mm PAM, but I can't go for anything too chunky e.g. larger Breitlings, PO Chrono's etc. Probably if you've got 7.5"ish wrists you'll be fine with most larger/thicker watches, but still get away with smaller dressy watches.
(I guess this is why manufacturers make different case sizes!)
Ha ha ha!
Whatever the objective appreciation for an item, be it a watch, a car, a painting or wine, the other part of the sum is subjective, and that's what makes the item 'in' or 'out'. Simples.
What a beautiful morning it is here! Time for a stroll...
Presumably he was joking, or fishing for a bit of attention, when he typed this.
Otherwise his village must be missing their idiot.
No you have misunderstood. Your not a true petrol head until you have "owned" a Porsche and until you have "owned" a Rolex.
Of course I know you actually understand what I said, your just being stubborn! ;-)
So you are not a REAL man until you have been to bed with Scarlett Johansson
Is that your logic ???
You cannot make any meaningful comment on her performance until you have. That's my sentiment.
I knew she was seeing someone else behind my back...women
I love Rolex, and really can't abide modern Omegas. We all have different tastes, it's no biggie.
I agree. Same thing goes for 'divers' watches
That's fair enough, but most people don't actually use thier diving wthes for diving. Your perspective is of course completely valid when discussing the merits of watches when actually used for thier intended purpose.I agree. Same thing goes for 'divers' watches
Allegedly, you're not a true petrol head until you have owned an Alfa Romeo, not a Porsche! Either way, it's a crock of shite which ever way you try and spin it.
Porsche? Alfa Romeo? Rolex?
Anyone up for a game of Top Trumps?
Hi Kevin
Thanks for replying to my thread. I had a bit of an unusual and welcome surpise incoming that has been on my wrist for two days ( and that alone is quite unusual for me). It is a Tudor Hydronaut II with carbon fibre dial and on a bracelet. This is my first Tudor and it looks ( if you do a quick glance) like I wanted the old Explorer II to look like. It sits quite flat on the wrist and feels really nice to wear. To be honest - I get more pleasure from it that any Rolex I have had and the packaging trumps Rolex in my opinon. I am so impresed I think this watch will be my first reveiw with pics on here.
I know that these watches aren't Submariner enough for some, but I really like the case and it looks more like the newer Rolex cases. Just my opinion for what it's worth. :)
I didn't get the Rolex thing either, my brother-in-law has a sub and it is a status statement for him, not a watch with bags of history.
I had been put off them because they are an aspirational watch for most people (not necessarily WIS) and as such a Rolex will be for some about, bragging rights.
When the GMTIIC came out a few years ago I thought it was a cracking looking watch, and duly went off to a reputable AD to be enchanted - I wasn't! and I wrote about my experience on the forum.
Fast forward a year or so and a friend at work had one which I looked at and played with, it was in my opinion a different watch to the one in the AD, it was gorgeous - the moral of my story is:
- Seeing watches in ADs with the harsh light the sweaty murmurings of the salesperson, do not get you in a good place to appreciate the watch.
- Watches you perhaps don't appreciate at one point in time, can grow on you and become, awesome.
I bought a GMTIIC last November, it's style and finish is fantastic and I am so glad I put the effort in to appreciate it.
Other watch brands mimic Rolex such as Steinhart, none of these have appealed to me because they are trying to be a Rolex plain and simple.
I never "got" Rolex either at first. In fact, I think most new-to-watches people are often hugely underwhelmed when they actually see a Rolex. But over time they have started to grow on me, and I could see myself owning one in future, despite having said that I never would. I'm particularly interested in some of the more understated, smaller models, without the cyclops date.
Definitely want a vintage one at some point. But I would also consider a new Explorer I (39mm).
The problem for me is that I'm in Zurich at the moment, and Rolexes are everywhere. I actually commented on a guy's Rolex once. He was an Englishman who had just come over to work for UBS. He spent his first month's wage on it, as he said he looked around at work and just "felt like he needed to have one too". Maybe I'll get one as a "leaving gift" for myself when I eventually depart Switzerland.
Last edited by Rano85; 16th February 2013 at 19:24.
Time for the obligatory Explorer 1 pic.
That's brilliant reasoning. I tried on my very first Omega today- a 2004 Seamaster 300M Chronometer. Although I was absolutely stunned by the sheer feeling of quality and class in the watch, I didn't have the time in the store to truly be able to appreciate the watch. It wasn't one of Omega's styles that I liked at first but it's grown on me massively, and is now one of my grail watches.
Ever tried a GMT of DeepSea ?
Just what the thread needed: vintage Rolex. It's actually illegal to dislike these.Time for the obligatory Explorer 1 pic.
This is a good point actually - I was put off an Omega AT for years because the light in the 'boutique' made it look far too blingy. The point of the dial design only became clear in the moody lighting of a nice restaurant. The lighting in display cabinets and windows usually seems to work, but the idea that you want to see the shiniest watch in the world on your wrist when you look in the mirror doesn't make sense to me at all. An AD is not always a very good place to get the measure of a watch - it takes a few weeks on the wrist for sure.
Posting Permissions
