The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 1 February 2012, 04:46 AM   #1
TheVTCGuy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Paul
Location: San Diego
Watch: 126619LB
Posts: 21,541
It's not going to happen, but why not a 42 GMT/Sub?

I can hear the purists banging on me right now... But, think about this practically for a moment.

Rolex has shown they at least want to enter the "big" watch market by introducing the DSSD and the EX II 42, now that the components are there, why not offer some of the other sport models in 42? The submariner is designed to be used diving, obviously visability is limited underwater and legibility would be increased with a bigger face. The GMT is a no-brainer, they already have the movment (it's used in the EXP II), all they would need is a new dial and bezel.

Isn't it at least... Possible?
TheVTCGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 04:50 AM   #2
nch209
"TRF" Member
 
nch209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Nathan
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 2,775
I think in time, 42mm is quite possible...
__________________
nch209
nch209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 04:57 AM   #3
padi56
"TRF" Life Patron
 
padi56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 52,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
I can hear the purists banging on me right now... But, think about this practically for a moment.

Rolex has shown they at least want to enter the "big" watch market by introducing the DSSD and the EX II 42, now that the components are there, why not offer some of the other sport models in 42? The submariner is designed to be used diving, obviously visability is limited underwater and legibility would be increased with a bigger face. The GMT is a no-brainer, they already have the movment (it's used in the EXP II), all they would need is a new dial and bezel.

Isn't it at least... Possible?
Its the case thats slightly bigger the dial size are around the same as the 40mm models.And the movement in the new Explorer11 would fit in the old Explorer 11 much like the cal 3135 thats in the DSSD fits in the DJ, Sub,YM etc.
__________________

ICom Pro3

All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only.

"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever."
Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again.

www.mc0yad.club

Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder
padi56 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 05:09 AM   #4
karmatp
"TRF" Member
 
karmatp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Trevor
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,740
My fingers are crossed for a 42mm Sub. It would be different than the Sub Date and just a perfect watch.

42mm case with a man's sized crown, perfect.
__________________
My grails:
karmatp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 05:55 AM   #5
Cru Jones
2024 Pledge Member
 
Cru Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 34,376
Are there that many people holding off on buying these two models because they're 40 and not 42 mm?
Cru Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 06:16 AM   #6
brownbear
"TRF" Member
 
brownbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Danny
Location: georgia
Watch: it Bub
Posts: 1,334
personally, I am not crazy about the mega watches..
To me, they seem trendy..
I know Invicta puts out a bunch of these mega beasts and I am not interested.
brownbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 06:34 AM   #7
padi56
"TRF" Life Patron
 
padi56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 52,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by brownbear View Post
personally, I am not crazy about the mega watches..
To me, they seem trendy..
I know Invicta puts out a bunch of these mega beasts and I am not interested.
Hardy mega we are talking about just a few mm and less than a ounce in weight difference.
__________________

ICom Pro3

All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only.

"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever."
Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again.

www.mc0yad.club

Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder
padi56 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 06:57 AM   #8
Gagebuilder
"TRF" Member
 
Gagebuilder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Doug
Location: Detroit Area
Watch: out for yelow snow
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by padi56 View Post
Hardy mega we are talking about just a few mm and less than a ounce in weight difference.
Funny, the first thought I had when reading the title was ...

Why stop at 42?

But I'd rather see the ceramic pepsi.

Yeah, it could be 42 ...
__________________
So it's not the steam that causes the failure, but it's water that you notice in the watch after a shower that could lead you to believe the steam damaged the seal, but it's just the unfortunate result of an unserviced mechanical beast.
Gagebuilder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 07:54 AM   #9
rolexnewbie2
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: STL
Watch: 116613 LB
Posts: 89
That would be awesome or even a 44'' model
rolexnewbie2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 07:59 AM   #10
capote
"TRF" Member
 
capote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Daniel
Location: Sweden
Watch: 16570
Posts: 7,317
If you listen carefully you will hear my head banging

Seriously. I will never understand the big watch trend. Without going into details that would ban me, lets just say smaller - and by smaller I mean 40 mm or less -will always look more refined. Big watches just looks...you know.
capote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 08:03 AM   #11
DDG
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: Dennis Garrett
Location: Land of Oz
Watch: Rolex Explorer II
Posts: 405
I love Explorer ll's, but I took one look at that 42 & decided it was too big for me to adjust to. I'm a normal sized person, but the old model fits me just perfect. I'm going to zero in on a new GMT now I guess, while it's still the right size.
DDG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 09:03 AM   #12
brownbear
"TRF" Member
 
brownbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Danny
Location: georgia
Watch: it Bub
Posts: 1,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by padi56 View Post
Hardy mega we are talking about just a few mm and less than a ounce in weight difference.
I still do not like it.
brownbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 11:02 AM   #13
sam florio
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: toronto
Watch: DJ II
Posts: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cru Jones View Post
Are there that many people holding off on buying these two models because they're 40 and not 42 mm?
Yes ....me
sam florio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 11:42 AM   #14
Perdu
"TRF" Member
 
Perdu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Gary
Location: GMT-6
Watch: GMT
Posts: 3,350
In Rolex time they have just bought out a new GMT and new Sub. They aren't going to change them anytime soon.
__________________
Omega Seamaster 300M GMT Noire
Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 8500

Benson 1937 Sterling Silver Hunter
Perdu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 03:30 PM   #15
opaline460
"TRF" Member
 
opaline460's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: US
Posts: 3,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by perdu View Post
in rolex time they have just bought out a new gmt and new sub. They aren't going to change them anytime soon.
x2
opaline460 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 08:37 PM   #16
dddrees
"TRF" Member
 
dddrees's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Real Name: Dan
Location: USA
Watch: This N That
Posts: 34,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by perdu View Post
in rolex time they have just bought out a new gmt and new sub. They aren't going to change them anytime soon.
x3
__________________
When it captures your imagination, that's when you know you have found your passion.

Loyal Foot Soldier of The Nylon Nation.

Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of
Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
dddrees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 08:40 PM   #17
HL65
TRF Moderator & 2024 Patron
 
HL65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Ken
Location: SW Florida
Watch: One on my wrist.
Posts: 63,322
Don't hold your breath...
__________________

SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT
HL65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 February 2012, 08:44 PM   #18
Oyster Junkie
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Real Name: Barry
Location: Yosemite Nat.Park
Watch: Idiot Savant
Posts: 731
Not gonna happen.
Oyster Junkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 February 2012, 02:56 PM   #19
mike
"TRF" Member
 
mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,683
There's more to the thought than simply expanding a reference to 42MM. People seem to be quick to think it's all about looks.

When the new EXP II made it's debut it was reported the increase in size was due to the slightly larger 3187 movement. The increase in size had to do with a different shock absorbing system. This would indeed be in line with the historical significance of the the EXP II.

Early Rolex advertizing refered to the Explorer II as the "Hard Rolex". No doubt to the use of a fix bezel as opposed to the rotating GMT insert--one less thing to go wrong. While both references have shared the same movement (untill now). Rolex does what it does to keep references seperate for their intended purpose.

Could a larger GMT or Sub come about? Sure. But, I'll bet there will be more to the watch than just expanding the size.

Not everything is about "market pressure".
mike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 February 2012, 03:09 PM   #20
michigander
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Real Name: Terry
Location: Detroit/Socal
Watch: GMT-Master 16700
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by brownbear View Post
personally, I am not crazy about the mega watches..
To me, they seem trendy..
I know Invicta puts out a bunch of these mega beasts and I am not interested.
Invictas are monsters!
michigander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 February 2012, 05:50 PM   #21
blackreplica
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: 35,000ft
Watch: GMT II C
Posts: 29
I personally would jump on a 42/44mm case ceramic GMT but honestly I don't think it will happen for at least another 5-10 years, if at all
blackreplica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 February 2012, 02:45 AM   #22
FX44
"TRF" Member
 
FX44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: John
Location: Charlotte, NC
Watch: Submariner 114060
Posts: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by nch209 View Post
I think in time, 42mm is quite possible...
agree
__________________
Submariner 114060
FX44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 February 2012, 02:52 AM   #23
GradyPhilpott
2024 Pledge Member
 
GradyPhilpott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Tudor Big Rose
Posts: 34,329
To me the difference between 40mm and 42mm is significant and affects the proportions of the entire watch.

What if they upped the cases for the Sub and the GMT to 42mm and scaled back the lugs to a less grotesque proportion?

Well, maybe, as long as they don't put "super hands" on them.

The fact is, though, that I have all the Rolex watches that I'm likely to ever own, so where Rolex goes stylistically is immaterial to me. I have mine!

Now, there is this certain 40mm Patek that has caught my eye, but it could take me five years to get the money to buy one outright, so....

Well, you never know!
__________________
JJ

Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner
GradyPhilpott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 February 2012, 02:55 AM   #24
GradyPhilpott
2024 Pledge Member
 
GradyPhilpott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Tudor Big Rose
Posts: 34,329
Actually, thinking about it a little more, I think that watches will shrink and keep shrinking until they are simply a digital LCD screen imbedded in a contact lens, powered by the heat of your body and the motion of your eye.
__________________
JJ

Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner
GradyPhilpott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 February 2012, 06:45 PM   #25
htc8p
"TRF" Member
 
htc8p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Bert
Location: philippines
Watch: 116710 ln
Posts: 3,434
no i wont want to change the size of the classic rolex. its the only thing i can hold on to that wont change.

besides the gmt can and should be used as a formal watch so 40mm is the right size.
htc8p is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.