freddy333 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Has there been any discussion about the new Rolex Sky-Dweller? What's the point of this watch? I would have traded the slightly busy-looking Romans for simple bars or dots & shrunken the case a couple of mms, but I like it (in white gold or platinum). I am also 1 of the few who appreciate the Yachtmaster II (also in a white metal), so I am a bit biased. I think the basic layout of these watches walks that fine line between pompous bling & technical wonkiness, leaving them just this side of gentlemanly acceptability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irolexu Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 I have to agree with this post. Rolex has definitely taken a few steps back...no new model has me blown away...just wait till the sub comes up with polished center links...maybe that will be their wake up call... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lhooq Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Has there been any discussion about the new Rolex Sky-Dweller? Technically brilliant movement, resulting in an unintuitive and inelegant reading of the calendar. Design-wise, think it looks like a dirty Datejust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praetor Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 I think the sky dweller is definitely in line with the image rolex is trying to associate with: bling/status symbol. Also, it's the first time in decades that Rolex came up with another complication other than chronograph/date/gmt. off topic: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noel Fleischer Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 I have to say, as a proud new owner of the Exp.2 @ 42mm- its a great watch. I love the size and feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 @Noel: That IS nice. This white Explorer II is the only new Rolex model that I like. Enjoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ldegeneve Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 I don't even like the white gold surrounds. 16610, 16750...those crossed the line too far into jewelry IMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woof* Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 I feel everything after the 16610 series starts getting too big, too shiny and too modern. It really looks like Rolex is lowering itself by trying to out-bling Brietling and Omega. Look at the new bracelets on the subs and Gmt's. Out of all that mess I find the ceramic Gmt's the least offensive..but for it's bracelet. DSSD? Yikes! Gigantic turtle on your wrist with a thin band looks so out of balance. The DSSD design isn't bad had they not made it as big as a hocky puck and the bracelet was in proportion to the case. Most of Rolex's new line has turned into male bling jewelry to me. I have always thought that if they really wanted to sell more watches and get the customer base more devoted they should reissue the older watches. Many other types of company's have done this with great success. Both Fender and Gibson guitars have reissued their most popular models, taking great pains to reproduce them as accurate as possible. This has made both companies rich. Very much like vintage Rolex, vintage guitars started getting collectable and prices soared...just like Daytona's, Subs and GMT's. Guys like us were making ''reps' of those guitars so both company's decided after trying to fight the rep builders to join in and reissue the guitars. I would have to say in both Fender and Gibson sell more vintage styles than modern. I know I would buy a brand new 5512 or 1675 if Rolex offered them. This would not diminish the collectors watches at all, it didn't with the guitars. Maybe some new precision features that are non cosmetic, but keep the designs accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lhooq Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 I have to say, as a proud new owner of the Exp.2 @ 42mm- its a great watch. I love the size and feel. I had a co-worker who bought one earlier this year, and I agree: It's got presence like Santa! However, I slightly prefer the black version, on account of the partly-blacked-out GMT hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeromatic Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 (edited) Here's a boring and controversial rant from a conservative and dull Rolex man. If you strongly disagree with my offensive views, feel free to post just as controversial replies. Biggest recent design mistakes by Rolex Thoughts? I could have written this myself word for word ! i would prefer to wear a replica vintage sub than any of those bulky gens dials,markers, cases and so on, the classic sea dweller is the most perfect proportions and dare i say slightly better that a same period submariner (just my own thoughts there no offence i love the older 5513s) i ordered one of the first gmt oversized reps sold it soon after it just looked dull next to the classic none ceramic subs i dont even like the later maxi dials the vintage subs had perfect sized markers and case size and a real cool presence on the wrist .long live the vintage submariner and pepsi gmts and no crownguard subs and vintage tudor subs! Edited October 9, 2012 by aeromatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeromatic Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 (edited) Has there been any discussion about the new Rolex Sky-Dweller? What's the point of this watch? Taking a quote out of that classic cary grant film north by northwest ,this problem can be best disposed of from a great height skydweller ? throw it out of an aeroplane ! apologies to anyone who likes this watch . whats the point indeed ! Edited October 9, 2012 by aeromatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 It'd be interesting to see the current Rolex sales figures for the new models... compared to the old line. It seems that people in the gen watch forums aren't too excited about them, either. PS: Isn't it sad how badly they ruined the TT Sub dial? Now it's just plain, dilute blue... compared to the old rich, deep blue on 16613. The new Sub isn't a bad looking watch. But again... it's just not as nice as the old, iconic design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeromatic Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 It'd be interesting to see the current Rolex sales figures for the new models... compared to the old line. It seems that people in the gen watch forums aren't too excited about them, either. PS: Isn't it sad how badly they ruined the TT Sub dial? Now it's just plain, dilute blue... compared to the old rich, deep blue on 16613. The new Sub isn't a bad looking watch. But again... it's just not as nice as the old, iconic design. Actualy the new TT looks more like a fake with cheap looking finishes, the old blue TT has rich luster i used to own a noob TT and i want to replace it but only with the older version none ceramic sub ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted October 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 Try to source the WM9 v2 version of the TT Sub. Expensive but worth it. If I ever purchase another Rolex rep, that will be the one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeromatic Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 Try to source the WM9 v2 version of the TT Sub. Expensive but worth it. If I ever purchase another Rolex rep, that will be the one. http://www.rwg.cc/to...pics-pics-pics/ By-tor thanks yes im very impressed i wonder if yuki is planning a stamped version on the 3135 clone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted May 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Hey... I posted this a few years ago. How do you feel about the fat lugs models now? Has your opinion changed? I still don't like them... being the boring old conservative me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highoeyazmuhudee Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 still agree, modern subs arent as good looking. ive warmed up to them a bit, but not enough to say yes. the new 2014 seadweller isnt too bad looking, nor is the new pepsi gmt, still wouldnt buy one though the midnight blue edition tudor heritage black bay is probably the only new design from rolex i would buy, probably because it has no lugs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 There's nothing like a vintage Sub. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted May 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 I agree Nanuq. That's some cheap Dweller though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Yeah, I think it was $175 brand new. Y'know it's one of those Timex / Rolex decisions. What the heck, spend the extra $50 and go big, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted May 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Yeah... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyB Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Most of the 1675s we have here cost more than $515! I haven't changed my mind either. It's vintage for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanuq Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Vintage Rules! That's what brought me to TRC lo these many years ago, looking for something besides a flat/ugly contemporary Sub. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted May 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Most of the 1675s we have here cost more than $515! Check the date of that receipt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aajaxx007 Posted May 26, 2014 Report Share Posted May 26, 2014 Damn I thought the Yachty II was kind of dope. To be frank every time I try to get into vintage Rolex I get turned off by the lightweight bracelet and tuna can clasp. The updates described by the OP do not bother me so much, but then again I have only been collecting watches for 5 short years. I did not grow up on the vintage models, so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.