Quote:
Originally Posted by Catyack
Rolex claims Paraflex has 50% better shock absorption performance, so to say it doesn't would be something to take up with both their engineering and marketing departments. The fact that developing/producing something in-house better controls their supply chain certainly doesn't refute the performance claim, there doesn't only have to be one upside. It seems rather doubtful that Rolex marketing would be making unsupportable claims with regards to engineering, especially for something that can be proven through testing.
And why wouldn't they put their best, new shock protection system in their top-of-the-line DD first, and then the Explorers? All Rolexes are built to be tough, including DDs, and the term "sports model" isn't one Rolex uses.
|
I'm not dismissing Rolex's marketing claims about the performance of the Paraflex system - although a 50% improvement of a small number is still a small number. I'm questioning the unsubstantiated implication that the 3187 movement is any more robust than the 3135.