Reply With QuoteI can only speak about what I've seen, not owned. But the 41mm (which is actually <40mm) has much better proportions and is all round better IMO.
The DJII will be forever known as a Rolex mistake IMO.
Has anyone migrated from a Datejust II to a Datejust 41 and lived to tell ?
I currently have a Datejust II with smooth bezel and blue dial, and have always found it a bit chunky for my liking. The new Datejust 41 really looks quite amazing, especially the blue dial 2017 version. I had very much hoped for a DJ40, but maybe one day....
I cant seem to find any side by side pictures, and haven't had time to visit an AD.
For those who migrated to the new DJ 41, what have your impressions been ? Does it wear smaller or the same as the DJ2 ? Is it more comfy ? Was it worth the hazzle ?
Cheers,
Henrik
I can only speak about what I've seen, not owned. But the 41mm (which is actually <40mm) has much better proportions and is all round better IMO.
The DJII will be forever known as a Rolex mistake IMO.
Last edited by -Ally-; 25th April 2017 at 21:04.
Haven't seen irl but the pictures of the DJ41 look fantastic and I have never been a fan of the DJ2. The DJ41 is what the DJ2 should have been.
Interesting- why do you say that it's less than 40mm ? Everywhere it is stated as 41. But if it is, that makes a huge difference, as I'd prefer it at 40-ish...Originally Posted by -Ally-
Last edited by Henrik Gelardi; 25th April 2017 at 21:11.
Someone on TRF put their calipers on it and measured it.
I can see why they might want to claim it's 41mm for the benefit of those with performance anxiety, but it had actually put me off as it sounded too large.
Think I found the thread. That is amazing. I am a bit shocked at the results, but I guess I now have to visit an AD with my DJ2 and see for myself. Oh, and possibly switch :-)
I like my DJII ;)
It's just a matter of time...
I am still to see a DJ-41, can see it being any better, maybe slightly over the failed DJ-II.
it's a sporty / smart-ish watch, designed at 36mm where all the dimensions are in proportion. Going big, in my eye, just makes everything look fat and it looses the classical lines.
Sorry to use the car analogy, but I'm going to.
Ford Mustang, original a great looking car, the new one, also a looker, but in a tonka toy sort of way. IMO
Design notwithstanding, let's not forget the superior 3235 movement, 70h power reserve, amagnetic, new bracelets integrated to the case, slimmer case, jubilee with easy extension link etc...
The DJII wasn't a failure it actually sold well but the proportions were a bit off...
I do like the easy-link I have one on my Oyster bracelet, but what bracelet integration?
The 3235 is an improved movement with its longer power reserve, but other specs are the same -2/+2, COSC certified, Paramagnetic blue Parachrom hairspring
So do I , don't understand why any Rolex with dimensions greater than 40mm is seen as a bad thing.?
I have a preference for a larger watch due to the size of my wrist not my ego!
Posting Permissions