ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
25 January 2015, 11:30 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: David
Location: New England
Posts: 1,888
|
Cyclops question
Looking for some opinions, just picked up a Sub and the cyclops looks to magnify a bit less than other older models/examples I've seen. Curious the groups thoughts on this? Is this normal? A change in the way they are being produced? Or just part of varied QC? Pic for example:
|
25 January 2015, 11:31 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: David
Location: New England
Posts: 1,888
|
And here's my vintage datejust for comparison:
|
25 January 2015, 11:40 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: new york
Watch: 116334 & 116610
Posts: 1,310
|
Here's mine for reference. Sorry it's not a close up but the best pic I had. Yours seems fine to me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
25 January 2015, 11:40 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
Not normal but has been showing up a decent amount here on the forums. Bring it back if it bothers you.
Check out this thread http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=386768 |
25 January 2015, 11:47 AM | #5 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: David
Location: New England
Posts: 1,888
|
Quote:
|
|
25 January 2015, 11:49 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 360
|
I would return the watch. I don't like the latest batch of cyclops with sub-par magnification at all. Hopefully Rolex fixes this ASAP.
|
25 January 2015, 11:51 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 360
|
|
25 January 2015, 11:52 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
rolex will change out the crystal for you at no charge so I would guess that this is a bad batch of droplets. There's no way that that is 2.5 magnification.
|
25 January 2015, 12:07 PM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Real Name: Flavio
Location: N/A
Posts: 14,652
|
Price rising and magnification falling. Brave new world.
|
25 January 2015, 12:13 PM | #10 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,509
|
I've posted about this topic on numerou occasions. I have what I assume was one of the original batch of BLNRs back in 2013 (got first one my AD received) and the magnification always bothered me. In fact I had the opportunity to buy one at another AD before then but I declined because I thought there was a defect in the mag. Anyway when I was seeing that universally I went ahead with the purchase. Now that it's been a couple of years and I've seen some (not many) BLNRs with the correct mag, just today I took it back to the AD and asked them to send it to the RSC for warranty crystal replacement. It will be on the way Monday and I'll update everyone on what happens.
|
25 January 2015, 12:14 PM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: CA
Watch: 116519LN
Posts: 614
|
Here's mine:
|
25 January 2015, 12:15 PM | #12 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,509
|
I forgot to mention that I had a correct version and mine side by side and I noticed that the cyclops sits higher on mine than the correct one. On correct one it rises gently off the crystal. On mine it sits up a millimeter or two.
|
25 January 2015, 12:40 PM | #13 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,622
|
X2. Not the Rolex magnification they have developed for decades.
__________________
|
25 January 2015, 02:08 PM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 441
|
Should be 2.5X. I would ask to have the cyclops replaced. If it doesn't bother you.. just leave it.
|
25 January 2015, 02:14 PM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 614
|
The angle that you take the picture at and look at the watch makes a huge difference. Can't really compare pictures unless it's the identical angle. I agree that there is some variance going on with Rolex. Some of the date wheels seem a lot more bolded font than others that appear thinner and smaller
|
25 January 2015, 02:18 PM | #16 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Tom
Location: In a race car!
Watch: ME RACE PORSCHES
Posts: 24,123
|
Quote:
|
|
25 January 2015, 02:25 PM | #17 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Chuck
Location: SW Florida
Watch: 16233,16610,214270
Posts: 11,182
|
There is another thread on this.
http://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=388477
__________________
16233 Y Serial Datejust 16610 Z Serial Submariner 214270 Explorer 114300 Oyster Perpetual 76200 Tudor Date+Day |
25 January 2015, 06:21 PM | #18 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 6,585
|
I dropped two of mine at RSCNY this past Friday. They initially told me their tech didn't see a problem, but I decided to leave them for a second opinion on Monday. I'll keep everyone updated. Here are the watches.
__________________
WG SUB-116719 GMT MASTER II 126719 |
25 January 2015, 06:22 PM | #19 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 6,585
|
And the BLNR
__________________
WG SUB-116719 GMT MASTER II 126719 |
25 January 2015, 06:31 PM | #20 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 34,376
|
Most importantly, congrats on the new watch! A great choice.
Re: the cyclops, yes, that would bug me. It looks aftermarket? So, I would have an AD or boutique fix it ASAP. Rolex mystifies me sometimes. |
25 January 2015, 09:07 PM | #21 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: David
Location: New England
Posts: 1,888
|
Thanks guys. It's 6 months old purchased pre-owned with the warranty card. I love the watch but I think I'll head into AD today and see what can be done. It's a minor issue to me now, but may bug me in the future.
|
25 January 2015, 10:38 PM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Travis
Location: FL / NYC
Watch: Yes..
Posts: 32,027
|
It's strange because I'm seeing this more and more lately. During recent AD visits I've spotted the mag to be noticeably different on many of them.
Beginning to wonder if they are changing the process in how the cyclops is produced (and if so, why after all these years)? |
25 January 2015, 11:02 PM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 24
|
Hope you get it sorted. Mine was exactly the same and my AD arranged the return to the RSC. Took a couple of weeks but now it's tip-top (before and after shots below)!
Cheers! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
25 January 2015, 11:11 PM | #24 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
both your watches look ok to me from those pictures.
|
25 January 2015, 11:11 PM | #25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
|
25 January 2015, 11:12 PM | #26 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Watch: Dblue
Posts: 6,723
|
|
25 January 2015, 11:25 PM | #27 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: MJC
Location: PHL USA
Watch: IWC, Rolex, AP
Posts: 29,232
|
Quote:
If the AD doesn't help call the RSC yourself and arrange for it to be sent in
__________________
|
|
25 January 2015, 11:36 PM | #28 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: US
Watch: 16710B
Posts: 69
|
What does it entail to replace a crystal? Does it require the case back to be cracked open?
|
26 January 2015, 01:10 AM | #29 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Real Name: Roger
Location: ...
Watch: AP/Rolex/PP
Posts: 6,309
|
When I picked up my new YM a week or so ago, I was talking with my AD about this - and we looked through most of their stock of sport models and they didn't have any with reduced mag...they are on the lookout though.
I wouldn't buy one with the lower mag. But for those who have - I would personally consider sending them in for warranty crystals put on. But that's just me. |
26 January 2015, 01:31 AM | #30 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Chuck
Location: SW Florida
Watch: 16233,16610,214270
Posts: 11,182
|
I would not like a smaller magnification. I would send it back & have them change the Cyclops. This seems to be something with the newer models.
__________________
16233 Y Serial Datejust 16610 Z Serial Submariner 214270 Explorer 114300 Oyster Perpetual 76200 Tudor Date+Day |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.