closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 66

Thread: Rolex versus Others - try to make it a non aggressive (anti-Rolex) discussion

  1. #1
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Winchester
    Posts
    2,547

    Rolex versus Others - try to make it a non aggressive (anti-Rolex) discussion

    This may be a strange thread for some

    Rolex - I have a couple of Subs and an Explorer ll plus a few OP's

    I'm just not wearing my SS Subs anymore......... not because I dislike them, don't get my wrong, just that I have got fed up of seeing the typical Rolex Sub.......maybe on this forum!!

    I now tend to wear other watches, a couple of manual wind OP's, the Seiko SKX 007 and a Zodiac.

    Like most I look at the SC forum more than a few times a day - and see really attractive watches in the up to £3k range - used in great nick for less than half the Retail Price of the new equivalent.

    I do realise that part of the Rolex attraction is that the SS models seem to be a solid investment as well as a very well made watch........ and that they have produced many many millions over the years......... so naturally there are lots around compared with other makes).

    Just a general discussion - what do you guys think? ........ what's the logical step as after 20 years of "collecting" watches I'm just looking for a new direction - (I even looked at the Patek Philippe World Timer on here, but there is no way I could fork out £25k for a watch, although to many it is probably a bargain)........ I'm not a fan of the Panerai design .........I find certain Zenith models attractive ......... I have "gone off" Omega.........I like to wear my watches in rotation......... but I seem to have "collected" just over 20 watches and I'm not sure why?

  2. #2
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,686
    Blog Entries
    1
    I've gone the other way. When I first started collecting, I avoided Rolex like the plague. Too flashy, too obvious etc..
    Then I bought an LV off a friend because it was cheap. They just work. Fit well, keep half decent time and as said, don't lose much (these were the days they went down in value!)

    I'd say 90% of what I wear, and pretty much every watch I have on my to buy list is Rolex.

  3. #3
    Agree with Bills thinking...
    Just picked up an Omega PO in as new condition with later 8500 movement for less than half retail, about 3 yrs old and with a years dealer warranty on top.
    As accurate as any mech. Watch Iíve ever owned and a great day to day wear. I feel it was outstanding vfm even if deals on new ones are available such as granitequarries example on Sc.
    Some Sinn pieces starting to make real sense to me such as a Sinn ďNavitimer ď at £2600-ish vs a Breitling example at close to 3x this.
    No brained for me

  4. #4
    Master ryanb741's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,112
    I think the fact is that most people don't have unlimited sums of money to spend and as such gravitate towards Rolex as it is a 'safe' choice plus the watches have a timeless design DNA. Personally I've found them to be nice watches but a tad on the generic side but struggle to find much mainstream stuff out there that really sings to me. Recently my interest has been piqued by the smaller independents, I recently bought a Minase Divido, will probably get a ZRC next and so on. Anordain is looking enticing also. What this does mean is that value retention is annihilated so they do need to be keepers.

    I'm fortunate in so far as with the exception of Rolex I can get most of the mainstream brands at a decent discount but none of these stay - they are mainstream for a reason in being somewhat 'one size fits all' and as such I always end up flipping them as they aren't individual enough for me to keep them. It is telling that all the watches I have kept have come from smaller manufacturers with the ability to customise (for example my Dornbluth remains years after acquisition).

  5. #5
    It's become a standard response to such threads but I'd look at GS. In the 2-10k price range, nothing offers such good VFM imo, but you'll certainly take a hit if you buy at or near rrp.

  6. #6
    Master ryanb741's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,112
    I think the fact is that most people don't have unlimited sums of money to spend and as such gravitate towards Rolex as it is a 'safe' choice plus the watches have a timeless design DNA. Personally I've found them to be nice watches but a tad on the generic side but struggle to find much mainstream stuff out there that really sings to me. Recently my interest has been piqued by the smaller independents, I recently bought a Minase Divido, will probably get a ZRC next and so on. Anordain is looking enticing also. What this does mean is that value retention is annihilated so they do need to be keepers.

    I'm fortunate in so far as with the exception of Rolex I can get most of the mainstream brands at a decent discount but none of these stay - they are mainstream for a reason in being somewhat 'one size fits all' and as such I always end up flipping them as they aren't individual enough for me to keep them. It is telling that all the watches I have kept have come from smaller manufacturers with the ability to customise (for example my Dornbluth remains years after acquisition).

  7. #7
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave O'Sullivan View Post
    I've gone the other way. When I first started collecting, I avoided Rolex like the plague. Too flashy, too obvious etc..
    Then I bought an LV off a friend because it was cheap. They just work. Fit well, keep half decent time and as said, don't lose much (these were the days they went down in value!)
    This was my trajectory, I found the brand image off-putting at first. Then I discovered the vintage design classics that were functional and beautiful without being too showy. However the charm of these classic designs hasn't always survived the transition into larger and more luxurious modern versions. There are signs of improvement, with some more understated models that strike the right balance. I've come to realise though, that the essential design of the Oyster case was created to sit on the flat, central top part of the wrist in a certain way. Make it too big, and it won't overhang exactly, but it won't look right either. This has lead to Rolex struggling with case shapes and lug sizes as they try to make watches in 'modern' sizes. This rules out the current Explorer for me, which is a shame, and I'm still not sure they make a perfect modern interpretation of the Datejust either.

  8. #8
    The answer is variety - no matter how big or small the collection is and the taste.
    Rolex certainly is not the only game in town.
    Wearing a Sub everyday can get boring but if I had to have only one watch, it would be a Rolex Sub or an SD.
    Some people grow out of the hobby and nothing appeals to them. It can happen.
    There are lots of nice/good brands out there apart from Rolex.
    Omega, Longines, Oris, the pricier ones like AP, VC, ALS and cheaper micro brands.
    Hard to justify a Rolex if it doesnít really float your boat but to buy it only because it is considered a safe investment.
    Any watch that one likes can give an enjoyment whether it is $500 or 5000.
    Buy what you like at prices you can afford. It doesnít have to be Rolex vs others.
    And, not talking about OP here but if you donít like or canít have a Rolex, stop pretending that they are not great watches unless you are trying to convince yourself for whatever reason.

  9. #9
    I've owned Rolex in the past, but the brand is above my budget at present so I can only watch from a far.

    I do think it's a shame that the brand carries so much external baggage and that most of the discussion tends to be on availability, waiting lists, seen one in a window, pricing, annual price rises, warranty cards and of course flipping and profiteering. It would be lovely to see a thread where the actual watch is discussed and those external issues are left to one side.

    Very few other brands seem to generate the level of discussion that a Rolex seems to, most listed on SC turn into a battlefield fairly quickly.

    As others have said previously it does seem amazing the number of 'hot' watches that get flipped, especially the BLNR for some reason.

    Getting to the watches, a good condition 4 digit reference is the grail for most people and the 5 digit references are pretty good too and as a personal opinion, I prefer these to the later chunkier Ceramic watches. I'm sure the bracelets and the movements are far superior, but the look of the older watches does have a certain magic.

  10. #10
    Craftsman HookedSeven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    282
    I think that Rolex donít really offer any kind of technical advantage over other manufacturers that occupy the same market. Sure theyíre tough, accurate, and well put together, but theyíre not unique in those characteristics. What sets them apart are their extremely strong residuals, and their extremely strong brand image. But if youíre looking for a watch that sings to you, your looking for something that speaks to your heart not your head, and something that impresses you and not necessarily others.


    Maybe have three months away from any kind of online activity related to watches. Find what you like to wear when your only consideration is yourself. Move on anything that you donít wear even if itís a forum/collector favourite. And you might realize that you donít need a new direction, you might be happy just to stop !

  11. #11
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14,902
    Blog Entries
    2
    I do sort of see your point. 75% of my collection is Rolex. I have them because i love them all for different reasons, but sometimes i do get bored. Any rolex looks like a rolex, if that makes sense, and sometimes that isnt what i want to wear.
    I keep them because i know i'll go back to them easily once the ennui has passed.
    I wear Panerai when i'm not wearing Rolex. Might as well go the polar opposite of refined.

    Ive had Patek/AP and returned to Rolex. Probably wouldnt go back to either, and im just not keen on any of the standard forum favourites from other brands.

    Have you considered Moser?

  12. #12
    Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    6,492
    I do realise that part of the Rolex attraction is that the SS models seem to be a solid investment as well as a very well made watch........ and that they have produced many many millions over the years......... so naturally there are lots around compared with other makes).
    I think that this paragraph offers both a problem and a solution. As a rule, things that are common tend not to make particularly solid investments. At this point, Rolex are bending over backwards, and some buyers are bending over forwards, to ensure a perceived disparity between supply and demand. They are also leaders in restricting parts so as to ensure that there is an ongoing dependency for service and repair.

    For students of history, there is certainly a case to argue that Rolex just might be riding a bubble. At this point, one of the key reasons for buying a Rolex is less excellence and more that it will not be losing much in the way of value and may well be a bit of an investment in the short, medium and long term.

    The problem is that Rolex have produced millions of watches over the years. However, this statistic is entirely misleading. Between founding and around 1953 Rolex made a million watches. The next million took until 1964, the next in late 1969 and so on. By 1987 they were through ten million and made over half a million by the next year. Nowadays Rolex use random serials that don’t give a clue to production numbers and I don’t blame them.

    Rolex had a Golden Age for real investments. This isn’t it. If you want a future-proof Rolex, you want a combination of the sort of watches that made Rolex famous from a period when there were only a few made. Because everyone will secretly have a hankering for a 1016 Explorer or an early Sub and tough, there are not enough to go around, even if the market slumps a bit. Then the flight will be into popular rarity. Compared to the painfully overpriced million watch a year models available today, a sixties or seventies sub looks like a complete bargain and its rarity ensures that even in a slump there will not be enough to go around. I rather suspect that may not be true of the present crop.

    So go vintage, while fantasies about the modern stuff continue to suppress vintage values. Collect the watches that earned the laurels, not the ones that rest their bloated rehauts on the achievements of them. Sell off the modern stuff before it is too late and pick up some real horological royalty.
    Last edited by M4tt; 26th November 2019 at 15:37.

  13. #13
    Apprentice RVFIO's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    10
    Rolex are such an interesting point of discussion because they are a brand completely like no other in watches or anything else.

    On the pro side

    Timeless design. For me this is the most important thing. As a previous commenter said, most people donít have unlimited sums of money and want to buy something that they can wear for a long time - maybe for the rest of their lives, not something trendy. If you look at a Sub from the 50/60/70s compared to the most recent versions they are clearly the same watch. Updates, yes but the design language is the same and the old ones still look great because of that and you arenít going to be left with a watch that looks completely different to what the brand is currently doing. The same canít be said for the Omegas or Tags of the world whose old watches look outdated. Which feeds into the next point

    Value retention. Again, not everyone has unlimited pools of money and you never know what might happen so there is undoubtedly a feeling of confidence in being able to buy something and it not depreciating like a new car. This isnít the same as buying to flip which is undoubtedly a negative.

    They just work. Rolex, and particularly the 6 digit references, are tanks - they do exactly what youíd expect them to, and can take whatever youíll throw at them without babying. The bracelets are the best in the business and they feel great on the wrist, it feels like a luxury product.

    Theyíre desirable. Another thing which can be confused with some negative aspects, but it canít be overlooked that Rolex as a brand has a certain cache which is associated with luxury and many people like to know they have something which is Ďa bit specialí (or is seen as such by a significant number of people theyíll come across).

    Negatives

    Resellers/Flippers. The desirability and unavailability make Rolex a no brainier for the sort of culture vulture resellers that weíre inundated with online. The guys buying up the watches and flipping at double retail or whatever

    New money. There can be a brashness associated with Rolex that puts some people off, guys buying because they know the name rather than knowing anything about watches or the brand.

    Supply issues/warranty cards etc. The challenge of actually getting what are core models for the brand can become pretty tiresome for those who actually want the watches to wear, and must cause a lot of confusion for the sort of people who arenít watch guys but have saved up for a particular watch and are then told they canít buy it, there is a hypothetical waiting list which theyíll never reach the top of unless they spend £££ with the AD. It makes sense to limit supply to a certain extent, but there will come a point where the wider public will (or could) lose interest in watches they can only see online

    I suppose all in, itís easy to see what people like about Rolex, theyíre well made watches that donít depend on current trends or style. They fit into the sports watch category that people like and is largely so popular because of them. Theyíre not without their negatives - but the crucial point to me is that none of the negative stuff relates to the watches themselves

    Itís always worth considering this too:

  14. #14
    Coming back to your question rather than concentrating on Rolex as an investment, it is possible the interest in watches might have faded a bit. If not- there are so many choices- a nice GS ( diver if you ask me), or a Dornbluth.
    Some mid range Seiko like MM or baby MM or even a nice Longines or a Sinn or a Damasko.
    If you prefer vintage a Certina 1000m diver or Eterna Superkontiki.
    Thankfully today one is spooky for choices.
    The possibilities in 3000 range are endless.

  15. #15
    Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    6,461
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanb741 View Post
    Personally I've found them to be nice watches but a tad on the generic side but struggle to find much mainstream stuff out there that really sings to me.

    This, exactly.
    I have enjoyed every Rolex I've had (mostly vintage) but they don't exactly raise my blood pressure when I spot one out in the wild like in the old days.
    Rolex Sub & Rolex Datejust just feel like the current "I made it" watch, something Joe Bloggs aspires to own without realising that they are actually a very safe and (dare I say) boring choice.

    Now, given a choice between looking at a new Rolex window or a Tudor window, I'd choose Tudor.
    At least Omega roll out some weird and wonderful watches and special editions. In the Trafford centre I know the Omega boutique will be different every visit and have something to make me leave nose-prints on the glass. Rolex... not so much.

  16. #16
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Winchester
    Posts
    2,547
    Thanks for all your comments - really interesting

    as far as Rolex are concerned, I don't really consider them as "investments" - I bought the SS models when they were reasonable priced and I now consider my 16610 as a "daily beater" as I have worn it most of the time since 2003 - I have a lovely 1967 5513 which I wear on the odd occasion and the Explorer ll 16570 has really stayed in it's box for the last 8 years.
    This year I have bought 3 Oysters from the 1960's/70's - 2 manual wind and one Perpetual - which I now wear in rotation and if I were to buy another Rolex it would be a 36mm DateJust or a 16570, (?), or a 1950's vintage.

    I have a couple of preBond Omega's and a 200 SHOM, which I occasionally wear - I would not mind picking up a "vintage" MM300 - even a WatchCo - but prices now seem to be increasing rapidly

    I have a couple of Cartier 'tanks" - I bought these years ago but now they are just too small to wear BUT and I must say that I am tempted by the Tank Basculante that is for sale now on SC

    I also quite like the "Chrono" style watches and I have a few older models

    Unfortunately I tend to "buy" and never "sell" - I have a cupboard full of "old" camera equipment!!!

    Maybe I should sell most of them and buy a Patek Philippe as I have always been told by a couple of my Swiss friends that they are the best watches around for mere mortals
    Last edited by BillN; 26th November 2019 at 21:44.

  17. #17
    Grand Master learningtofly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Everywhere & nowhere, baby
    Posts
    28,850
    Some very sensible comments on this thread, which is good to see. From my perspective, I love the classic styling, the robustness and (yes) the fact that I can satisfy my yearnings without losing money.

    Iíd qualify that, however by saying that - these days at least - Iím a four or five digit man. I have a wide and varied taste in watches but admit that both the new GMT and the ceramic Daytona are watches that I prayed for in terms of new releases. However, I simply wonít allow myself to be sucked in by the hype and have had to accept that I probably wonít own either any time soon.

    I've owned many other brands over the years and will continue to do so whilst Iím fortunate enough to be able to. Iím sure Iím influenced to some extent by external factors and opinions but I really do try to ensure that I only buy what I like myself. It offers me the variety I want and the pleasure from ownership that this hobby is all about; when I find myself getting bored with what I have I find that thereís more than enough by way of options to mix it up a bit.

  18. #18
    Grand Master GraniteQuarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    25,758
    Comment by the OP regarding Rolex becoming rather ubiquitous strikes a chord with me too, every feckin car salesman I've dealt with in the past couple years has had one, real or otherwise...

    I've been rocking a £300 Seiko diver these past couple months (SubC needs serviced and St.James's is closed at the mo) and honestly I'm more than happy with it. Is there a 20x price differential between them? Is there bollocks!

  19. #19
    I have one Rolex - Daytona 116520 I got at a great price over 3 years ago, just before things went really crazy, never another. I've usually always bought on 'value' - forget residuals, just look at what I'm getting for my money and does it feel worth it. Now this is wholly subjective matter, but even taking out the Rolex, Pateks etc everything is getting more expensive. I've become much more interested in Independent watchmaking over the past few years and at the recent Watchmakers Club in London, I was shocked by how poor value the watches were.

    My Ming 19.01 is a rare example of what I consider some rather deft watch design and making at a relatively sensible price. Funnily a few punters who spotted the watch thought it was the most interesting thing at the event! But a lot are scared with residuals, even though it's a mute point as this watch is basically a keeper. More need to think about keeping instead of flipping (I think Ryan makes a good point about that above).

  20. #20
    Craftsman HookedSeven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by learningtofly View Post
    ...Iím sure Iím influenced to some extent by external factors and opinions but I really do try to ensure that I only buy what I like myself. It offers me the variety I want and the pleasure from ownership that this hobby is all about...
    This is the only way to build a collection youíll be happy with in the short term and the long term...

  21. #21
    Craftsman gerard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    766
    Quote Originally Posted by GOAT View Post
    Agree with Bills thinking...
    Just picked up an Omega PO in as new condition with later 8500 movement for less than half retail, about 3 yrs old and with a years dealer warranty on top.
    As accurate as any mech. Watch Iíve ever owned and a great day to day wear. I feel it was outstanding vfm even if deals on new ones are available such as granitequarries example on Sc.
    Some Sinn pieces starting to make real sense to me such as a Sinn ďNavitimer ď at £2600-ish vs a Breitling example at close to 3x this.
    No brained for me
    I have a PO 8500 and it is probably my favorite watch if truth be known. Tudor GMT comes close second.

    I have 4 Rolexes of which the EXP 2 1655, GMT II and Sub Date have not been worn in nearly a decade. 34mm Date used to be an every day watch but the PO put pay to that.
    I have them, but don't really see me wearing them...they attract too much attention and some parts I travel to that is not ideal.
    I remember recently landing in Caracas and the pilot (Iberia) announcing hide your valuables, particularly watches in the airport and going through customs, the officials and police will have them!
    The PO is just ignored but keeps cracking time, has British genius behind the movement which makes me smile and is one of the best looking watches out there IMHO. ( I also think my original SM300 of which the PO evidently has DNA, is a cracker).
    I have lots of watches from many brands (over 40...if not 50), Seiko are a favorite and the recent interpretation (SPB0 series) of the 62MAS and 6159-7001 (I have original of both) are cracking and completely wearable.
    Most of my vintage stuff while wearable and working is not really practical as I seem to be quite hard on watches...they are just a tool after all, only one I like the aesthetics of.
    (Sorry didn't mean this to be a boast of, look at me and what I have).
    Still think there great alternatives out there, the PO being one of them.

    Sent from my BBF100-1 using Tapatalk

  22. #22
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Milton Keynes
    Posts
    1,255
    As shared by some others, I too had a very strong dislike of Rolex when I getting my first decent watch. Boring and ubiquitous was what I thought when I got my Panerai (I know I know, hindsight eh..)

    Fast forward 12 years (and multiple watches) and I have come full circle. I think these last few years I'm come to fully appreciate the timeless design, pure ruggedness, and leading horological tech that they are renowned for. The only thing that puts me off is just how expensive they have got. If the GMTc I have is valued around 2-3k, then it would really be the perfect watch. Just can't justify something nearing 5 figures on my wrist. As it is, I'm always open to other brands and I think Sinn, Damasko, Oris, Tudor and of course Grand Seiko really speaking to me. Ultimately though, I think I will still have at least one Rolex in my collection.

  23. #23
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Unknown
    Posts
    1,383
    Collecting stuff goes through phases as knowledge builds and tastes develop.

    Sounds like you are at the end of an accumulation phase ... time to review and then start the editing phase as you tease out what you really like and let go what you have discovered what isn't for you ...

    The editing down phase can be just as much fun as accumulation as it helps you really focus on the bits you like.

    Once you are down to the keepers you can stand still or then start to accumulate again with the released funds and revised focus ...

    Don't look as this as an investment process; it's a hobby. We will all end up with our fingers burnt in the end as I just don't see the future generations being that interested in old watches.

  24. #24
    Grand Master Chris_in_the_UK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Norf Yorks
    Posts
    36,127
    I was always, always a Rolex man from the outset - spent many a day window shopping and bought my first (Sub No Date) in 1989. Over the subsequent years this was swapped for a SD (have owned 4 SD's over the years) and at one point I had a GMT Pepsi, White Exp and a SD. After 10 years of the collection moving around I ended up with what was supposed to be my grail (Daytona) it stayed 3 months and I decided it wore too small for my tastes at the time. All this time my buying and swapping was conducted mainly on here at sensible money (£2500 for a SD as an example). Over the last few years they have all gone - I dislike the new case design and this was the start of the demise from my collecting perspective. The recent furore and massive premium over list for certain models has really killed it for me and I refuse to get involved due to this and the warranty card fiasco.

    I enjoyed it whilst it lasted - I will not say I will never own one again, but the way I view this currently is that it is very unlikely.
    When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........

  25. #25
    I am of the opinion that all the various Rolex watches (GMT, Subs, SD and Explorers etc) I have had over the years were all very good watches and I can see why for anyone just wanting to purchase a watch, strap it on and wear it they make perfect sense being timeless classics, rugged, hardwearing with reliable time keeping.

    I do however feel that the way that prices have gone over the past couple of years is total madness. When you could purchase a sub or GMT for 4k I think they represented good value for money and I was comfortable wearing one but I am not sure that is true today.

    Having recently purchased a Seiko MM200 and although on SC due to wanting a non diver, I honestly cannot see much difference in terms of quality or time keeping from any Rolex I have owned. I would say the Seiko is certainly on par to the Omega PO I owned several years ago and even wears identical.
    Last edited by boring_sandwich; 26th November 2019 at 18:57.

  26. #26
    Master sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    UK/Canada
    Posts
    4,557
    I wonder how many people wouldn't be as interested in owning a stainless steel Rolex if they weren't the piŤce du jour or didn't carry the same potential to make a quick profit?

    I'm fairly confident, after over three years straight of wearing my Explorer, that I like it for what it is, not what it currently represents to a certain group of people.

  27. #27
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    178
    They are very well built in a mass produced sort of way, I was handling a simple entry level OP39 today and the SEL to case lug tolerances are in a league of their own. It was visually a better finished piece than the Aqua Terra.

    I think FOMO has had a massive part to play in the lemming like scramble for Professional models. If you take the Hulk for example, I remember them sitting in windows next to Subs for weeks/months on end as a sort of strange, garish novelty Sub that was not in great demand. Now they are like gold dust you get people eulogising about the amazing sunburst greens and the way the bezel and dial miraculously morph in to different shades and contrasts.

    If Rolex windows were like those in the Omega Boutique where every model is sitting in the case begging to be taken home and Omega ran the shortage and never never lists, it would be the amazing Planet Ocean that everyone would covet and there would be endless discussion about poor behaviour by Omega AD's.

  28. #28
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    103
    This is a four year old article but, for those who have not read it, still a terrific piece...


    https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/inside-rolex

  29. #29
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Wixams, Beds
    Posts
    833
    I have the occasional lust for Rolex models. Usually ones no one else wants at the time but then by the time the money is there they seem to be popular and therefore no longer represent the bargains they once were and become unattainable at ADís.
    This happened with the GMTm2, the explorer 2, and the datejust and now I just see them as I see BMWs, I admire their engineering and marketing but they are not really for me.
    Being on a limited budget I want my watches to be from the heart not the head which is why I buy the watches that I do which donít at the moment include any Rolex.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  30. #30
    While I enjoy a lot of other brands, if it came down to it I would keep a Rolex SD probably over any other watch I own or have ever owned.

    I think it's a case of, they may not be the best watch in the world but I think they really are better than other options at the same price. You can probably get between 75%-90% of the quality for 50% of the price with other brands, but most like Grand Seiko etc. generally lose me with the styling (or things like a power reserve on the SD dials), and Omega quality control has lagged a little behind in my experience of ownership.

    You need to like the style of the watch and then get the quality you want- very few brands that have a good level of quality hit that sweet spot of that and good looks on more than small number of their models - Tudor for example seems to sell well with one range in their line-up.

    You mention Zenith, and they have the history, some great looking models, and good quality. I don't think there are many others outside the main players that can claim the same.

    The alternative is as covered above - some of the smaller independents make some interesting watches - if you can find a style that you really like.
    It's just a matter of time...

  31. #31
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Winchester
    Posts
    2,547
    Quote Originally Posted by Omegamanic View Post
    While I enjoy a lot of other brands, if it came down to it I would keep a Rolex SD probably over any other watch I own or have ever owned.

    I think it's a case of, they may not be the best watch in the world but I think they really are better than other options at the same price. You can probably get between 75%-90% of the quality for 50% of the price with other brands, but most like Grand Seiko etc. generally lose me with the styling (or things like a power reserve on the SD dials), and Omega quality control has lagged a little behind in my experience of ownership.

    You need to like the style of the watch and then get the quality you want- very few brands that have a good level of quality hit that sweet spot of that and good looks on more than small number of their models - Tudor for example seems to sell well with one range in their line-up.

    You mention Zenith, and they have the history, some great looking models, and good quality. I don't think there are many others outside the main players that can claim the same.

    The alternative is as covered above - some of the smaller independents make some interesting watches - if you can find a style that you really like.
    I agree - the basic Rolex Sub, date or non-date at £5,500 is a "great" watch that is well built, always looks good no matter how it is worn in these modern times - it will last forever - service costs may be expensive, but most seem to run OK for 10 years without needing a service
    I have had really good service from my 2007 16610 and it is just reliable. tough and always looks good

    Although I would like a "Pepsi" - I do not think that I would appreciate it as must as the 16610 and at £9k and + I do not see it as good value

    I find it strange that the "coloured" Hulk and Batman are in so much demand and command such high prices and I have always seen the Daytona and Yacht Master as just bling watches, (not wishing to offend anyone)

    I do not mean to "knock" Rolex watches, that was never the intension of this thread, but even just a good 5513 is now £15k, (I paid £4.5k for mine 12 years ago, bought for my 60th), and although I see it as far more desirable than the Pepsi. Hulk or Batman, it's a lot of money to pay for a watch.
    Last edited by BillN; 27th November 2019 at 00:38.

  32. #32
    Grand Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brussel land.
    Posts
    13,738
    Quote Originally Posted by BillN View Post
    This may be a strange thread for some

    Rolex - I have a couple of Subs and an Explorer ll plus a few OP's

    I'm just not wearing my SS Subs anymore......... not because I dislike them, don't get my wrong, just that I have got fed up of seeing the typical Rolex Sub.......maybe on this forum!!

    I now tend to wear other watches, a couple of manual wind OP's, the Seiko SKX 007 and a Zodiac.

    Like most I look at the SC forum more than a few times a day - and see really attractive watches in the up to £3k range - used in great nick for less than half the Retail Price of the new equivalent.

    I do realise that part of the Rolex attraction is that the SS models seem to be a solid investment as well as a very well made watch........ and that they have produced many many millions over the years......... so naturally there are lots around compared with other makes).

    Just a general discussion - what do you guys think? ........ what's the logical step as after 20 years of "collecting" watches I'm just looking for a new direction - (I even looked at the Patek Philippe World Timer on here, but there is no way I could fork out £25k for a watch, although to many it is probably a bargain)........ I'm not a fan of the Panerai design .........I find certain Zenith models attractive ......... I have "gone off" Omega.........I like to wear my watches in rotation......... but I seem to have "collected" just over 20 watches and I'm not sure why?
    I seem to have gone from Omega via Planet Ocean, Seamasters and Aqua Terra's plus a few vintage ones over to Rolex Datejust TT, Explorer 2 Polar and Sub plus a vintage Precision! Have to say I still enjoy wearing them all, although there are inevitably favourites.
    Other brands I have include Seiko, Skagen, Armida, Casio, Dan Henry, Braithwait, Lasser and range from autos to cheapo LCDs. They all have their own plus points and some minus points, but I like having them all.
    Some are worth a lot more than others, but that doesn't always mean I like them more.
    Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.

  33. #33
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14,902
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by sean View Post
    I wonder how many people wouldn't be as interested in owning a stainless steel Rolex if they weren't the piŤce du jour or didn't carry the same potential to make a quick profit?

    I'm fairly confident, after over three years straight of wearing my Explorer, that I like it for what it is, not what it currently represents to a certain group of people.
    Im sure there are others within the forum who wear them for what they are.

  34. #34
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    4,036
    The funny thing about Rolex, is that you may well start out not appreciating them, or may even disapprove of them on some level. But then you reach a point in your life where you realise you can have one for free, as if it's a birthday present - go on, you've made it this far, have a Rolex, it's free. By this I mean of course, that you see one that you are fairly sure will hold its value, or increase enough to at least cover its service costs, and as luck would have it you have enough spare to buy it as you had a good year. And it's actually a rather lovely watch. And whatever you thought about them before, suddenly you are a Rolex owner, it seems rude not to be, and now you feel they are much misunderstood. Not that this works for all models at all times of course, but it has done for many over the years. You don't have to like it, but it makes them hard to ignore, and the fact that the older ones are far from ostentatious looking only compounds it. You simply can't escape the consequences of the brand recognition. Put one in a pile of equally battered vintage watches, and you'll find yourself thinking, 'Oh look, that one's a Rolex'. It's a blessing and a curse.

  35. #35
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    22,960
    Perhaps another way of looking at it, would be to ask yourself one question.

    If you could only have a single watch (which you could buy at retail) what would you buy? I have Blancpain, JLC, Panerai, Seiko, Omega, but if I could only have one watch then it would be a Rolex.

    My reasons are simple. Iconic design, reliable, robust, comfortable to wear, excellent aftersales support, and if you keep it for longer than 12 months, retain the ability to sell it for at least what you paid for it - so actually you wear it for free.

    I can only think of a handful other products in the market you can do this with, but I cannot afford any of them.

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  36. #36
    Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Winchester
    Posts
    2,547
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post
    Perhaps another way of looking at it, would be to ask yourself one question.

    If you could only have a single watch (which you could buy at retail) what would you buy? I have Blancpain, JLC, Panerai, Seiko, Omega, but if I could only have one watch then it would be a Rolex.

    My reasons are simple. Iconic design, reliable, robust, comfortable to wear, excellent aftersales support, and if you keep it for longer than 12 months, retain the ability to sell it for at least what you paid for it - so actually you wear it for free.

    I can only think of a handful other products in the market you can do this with, but I cannot afford any of them.
    I've quite simple tastes

    New it would be - (cheapest) Rolex Sub - Date or no Date

    Used -best 5513 that I could afford

  37. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyg View Post
    Perhaps another way of looking at it, would be to ask yourself one question.

    If you could only have a single watch (which you could buy at retail) what would you buy? I have Blancpain, JLC, Panerai, Seiko, Omega, but if I could only have one watch then it would be a Rolex.

    My reasons are simple. Iconic design, reliable, robust, comfortable to wear, excellent aftersales support, and if you keep it for longer than 12 months, retain the ability to sell it for at least what you paid for it - so actually you wear it for free.

    I can only think of a handful other products in the market you can do this with, but I cannot afford any of them.
    Your argument is flawed - if you could have one brand only, then the aspect of valuation and selling on in a year is mute.

    Design may be iconic, but it's now been copied so much. If name wasn't important, you might as well go and buy one of those derivatives. But the fact is name is important, so let's not beat about the bush about this.

  38. #38
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Surrey, UK. OdiŠxere or somewhere in-between
    Posts
    7,855
    Blog Entries
    19

    Rolex vs Others....

    Just a general discussion - what do you guys think? ........ what's the logical step as after 20 years of "collecting" watches
    You are asking for alternatives to Rolex? There are plenty. Personally a brand I have just discovered is Vacheron Constantin. I am intrigued by Zenith who have a new movement completely removing the need for conventional parts.

    After twenty years of watch collecting as well - I find the following:

    * I am pursuing innovative watchmaking - Patek has is research group for examples and Zenith is still innovating, the VC I have had the in-house cal 5100

    * The other finding is to collect icons -El Primero, cal 8900 Omega, Patek Calatrava, Breitling Navitimer, IWC Portuguese(r), Rolex Submariner etc.

    Martyn.

  39. #39

    Rolex versus Others - try to make it a non aggressive (anti-Rolex) discussion

    For all the merits of what has been said in this thread, surely the production of approximately one million mechanical watches to an accuracy standard of two seconds either way must be seen as a deeply impressive achievement?

  40. #40
    Craftsman HookedSeven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    282
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Side of The Loon View Post
    For all the merits of what has been said in this thread, surely the production of approximately one million mechanical watches to an accuracy standard of two seconds either way must be seen as a deeply impressive achievement?
    Iím not sure. As long as the regulation system allows for fine tuning then itís just a matter of regulating to get within a tolerance band like that. What is deeply impressive is if a movement can hold its timekeeping performance over a long period of time without needing re-regulating. I suspect modern Rolex movements are pretty good at that too.

  41. #41
    Master Mr Curta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Mainly UK
    Posts
    9,582
    Quote Originally Posted by gerard View Post
    I remember recently landing in Caracas and the pilot (Iberia) announcing hide your valuables, particularly watches in the airport and going through customs, the officials and police will have them!
    They've been known to phone ahead - passengers with valuables or who declare currency have been attacked as they leave the arrivals hall and some don't live to tell the tale.

  42. #42
    Master sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    UK/Canada
    Posts
    4,557
    Quote Originally Posted by verv View Post
    Im sure there are others within the forum who wear them for what they are.
    I'm sure there are plenty. The 'certain group of people' I was referring to are the profit-flippers and the instagram crowd that care more about image than substance.

  43. #43
    Craftsman Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    815
    When I look at my collections of this that and the other, all moderately priced in their fields, I often come to the same conclusion - I should have just bought one decent one. Rolex has a reverse cache to me, in the same way as my only watch has because of the Bond connection. If I had enough to buy several Rolex I would probably spend the money on one good used Lange instead.

    Someone here recently described the Reverso as the watch enthusiasts watch, and that is the sort of watch I would be looking for if money were no object, rather than a High Street watch. Perhaps you should look at slimming down the collection and getting a Lange.

  44. #44
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    22,960
    Quote Originally Posted by crazyp View Post
    Your argument is flawed - if you could have one brand only, then the aspect of valuation and selling on in a year is mute.

    Design may be iconic, but it's now been copied so much. If name wasn't important, you might as well go and buy one of those derivatives. But the fact is name is important, so let's not beat about the bush about this.
    Not really as personal circumstances can change. I said if I could only have one watch. Not I could only have one watch which I could never sell. But yes, I could buy a copy, a knock off or something similar, but why should I.

    As for the name. Indeed, but a brand name is usually born out of quality, much like Rolls Royce, Snap-On tools, Linn HiFi, Apple Phones, etc which was why I decided to buy my first Rolex in 1983, a long time before the current bubble.
    Last edited by Andyg; 27th November 2019 at 20:24.

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  45. #45
    I guess I can't be a watch enthusiast after all then, as the Reverso does nothing for me style wise, but then I've never really been a fan of tanks, and having had a quick peruse of the Lange website, I can honestly say I find all their offerings hideous, with the possible exception of the WG 1815 Homage, though god only knows what that costs.

    I don't do brands, I do styles, aesthetics, history, then find the best model I can within a particular value range. And I enjoy having a fairly diverse mix of styles to select from each week, just adds to the enjoyment of the hobby, for me anyway.

  46. #46
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    London
    Posts
    926
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Side of The Loon View Post
    For all the merits of what has been said in this thread, surely the production of approximately one million mechanical watches to an accuracy standard of two seconds either way must be seen as a deeply impressive achievement?
    Quote Originally Posted by HookedSeven View Post
    Iím not sure. As long as the regulation system allows for fine tuning then itís just a matter of regulating to get within a tolerance band like that. What is deeply impressive is if a movement can hold its timekeeping performance over a long period of time without needing re-regulating. I suspect modern Rolex movements are pretty good at that too.
    For me, itís not only the accuracy or staying accurate for a long period of time. It is also the consistency. When I put a Rolex on my timegrapher, the behaviour it exhibits is in a class of its own (compared to every other watch I have had - there may be better out there). Be it the beat error or the little to no variation between all 6 positions.

    Also, I run home from work once a week and whichever watch is in rotation that week either goes in my bag or very occasionally stays on my wrist for the run. The conditions arenít extreme by any standards but every other watch either gains or loses an astonishing 4-8 seconds after just ~1.5 hour of action. Rolex ones move by hardly 1 second, if at all, in the same time. Canít be a coincidence.

    Itís probably easy to forget the high standard to which these watches have been tested, in such large numbers. I wouldnít buy one at the inflated grey market prices but I do think at RRP, the above attributes will be hard to beat. Happy to be proven wrong though. The fact that I like the design is a big plus too and I wouldnít even consider one if it didnít appeal to me aesthetically.

    Disclaimer: I only have experience of modern professional Rolex models that display ďsuperlative chronometerĒ. No idea if the older ones are as good technically.

  47. #47
    Craftsman Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    815
    Quote Originally Posted by tomsdad View Post
    I guess I can't be a watch enthusiast after all then, as the Reverso does nothing for me style wise, but then I've never really been a fan of tanks, and having had a quick peruse of the Lange website, I can honestly say I find all their offerings hideous, with the possible exception of the WG 1815 Homage, though god only knows what that costs.

    I don't do brands, I do styles, aesthetics, history, then find the best model I can within a particular value range. And I enjoy having a fairly diverse mix of styles to select from each week, just adds to the enjoyment of the hobby, for me anyway.
    What about the Saxonia range? Beautiful watches by any measure - well my measure anyway!

  48. #48
    Grand Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brussel land.
    Posts
    13,738
    Quote Originally Posted by gerard View Post
    ...................
    I remember recently landing in Caracas and the pilot (Iberia) announcing hide your valuables, particularly watches in the airport and going through customs, the officials and police will have them!
    ............
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Curta View Post
    They've been known to phone ahead - passengers with valuables or who declare currency have been attacked as they leave the arrivals hall and some don't live to tell the tale.
    Sounds like somewhere to avoid if at all possible.
    Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.

  49. #49

    Rolex versus Others - try to make it a non aggressive (anti-Rolex) discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by oldoakknives View Post
    Sounds like somewhere to avoid if at all possible.
    Youíd have to be Caracas...

  50. #50
    Master bedlam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fremantle, Western Australia (GMT +8)
    Posts
    1,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Side of The Loon View Post
    For all the merits of what has been said in this thread, surely the production of approximately one million mechanical watches to an accuracy standard of two seconds either way must be seen as a deeply impressive achievement?
    It's an arbitrary standard though. It is impressive accuracy when limiting a watch to relatively inaccurate regulation. Comparing a Sub's timekeeping to my GS Diver makes the Rolex look ordinary.

    In fact comparing my GS Diver to my watchmaker's green Sub was interesting. He hadn't handled a GS previously and was impressed with it. The GS is better finished, far more accurate, and less expensive (given these are watches we are both happy to own and keep, we are not just road-testing them before passing them on).

    The only Rolex watches that are affordable are those you decide not to hold on to. Those worth keeping are an expensive proposition.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information