View Single Post
Old 3 March 2023, 05:59 AM   #6
tifosi
"TRF" Member
 
tifosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Russ
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 5,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastie View Post
To your first point, I guess that’s an aesthetic statement. But I kinda find that hard to believe when other modern sport watches like the AP Royal Oak, Nautilus, Aquanat, Overseas, etc. all feature some level of beveling / chamfering.

On the cost side of things, chamfering (cutting) the edges comes after the raw block of steel is CNC machined into a case. So definitely more expensive to chamfer vs not chamfer.

Would be sad if this was a Rolex cost cutting measure.
I see what you're saying about the RO.....but don't forget the RO looks exactly the same as it did in 1972. The Sub has progressed a bit since it was released.

I am fairly certain the omission of the chamfers is an aesthetic choice by Rolex.
__________________
Russ
tifosi is offline   Reply With Quote