Reply With QuoteI like the leopard Daytona.
It's so overdone that it's a bit of a FU to subtlety.
Pretty much the only Rolex I would own is the explorer 2 polar. The rest just don’t do it for me. The brand does not so it for me. Undeniably great watches and maybe one day my view will change. From taking to both watch people and non watch people it just generates the wrong sort of attention.
I like the leopard Daytona.
It's so overdone that it's a bit of a FU to subtlety.
The bloated DJ-II
forgot to mention this one, that design was just perfect for 36mm, doesnt scale up well at all.Originally Posted by nunya
It scales up fine. The DJ 41 is fine. The DJ 2 was a horrible mess.
Gets my vote.
If any other brand made it, it would forever be cited as the reason that brand was rubbish.
M
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
I'll grant that the YM-II ain't the best-looking design, but no other brand would even have the resources to manufacture a reliably water-resistant mechanical countdown timer that's programmable via the bezel. Though the watches may appear somewhat clownish, their unique 4160/4161 movements are no joke.
Sadly, I'm still not a fan of the all polished cases and / or centre links, maxi dials or the current oversized lugs that make the bracelets look too thin - at least for my eyes.
As have said, they are a tour de force when it comes to items like the Glidelock clasp - especially when compared to the older models, but they just don't do it for me.
Similarly items like using 904 steel, or Gold produced in their own foundry, fail to justify the premium as it continues to grow apace.
I guess that makes the current line up a bad watch for me as soon as you go beyond the basic OP.
But their continued sales growth suggests that my views may be in a minority!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by adg31; 16th December 2017 at 22:28.
That's 100% true. Then they stuck it into the worst looking watch possible. Someone at rolex styling was drunk when they ok'd that thing.I'll grant that the YM-II ain't the best-looking design, but no other brand would even have the resources to manufacture a reliably water-resistant mechanical countdown timer that's programmable via the bezel. Though the watches may appear somewhat clownish, their unique 4160/4161 movements are no joke.
It's so ugly and large it would be right at home in Omega's catalog - with an eta derived movements most likely.
Taste is subjective.
SD4K, very few people liked them (although I always did), you used to see them sat in every Rolex AD in-loved and unwanted so after just 3 years Rolex discontinued it and now everyone wants one.
The uniformity of the look is Rolex’s strong point but also a point of lack of desirability in my mind I tend to like watches produced up to 1990 From the range I think a 36mm Explorer or a Pepsi GMT. Actually I’d add a Precision into that mix as well as models I’d like to own. It’s the same I suppose for all watch brands but those models up to that period give a reason for owning one other than just I’ve got a ROLEX!!!!
When looking at vintage the sheer range of Omega keeps me happy and also the capacity to own one on limited resources makes it achievable .
So, the answer is no, and also yes.
Over all, no in measurable terms, reliability, WR, desirability, history, etc.
Aesthetically, yes, not measurable as looks are subjective
Posting Permissions