New cases

[Mrdi]

I hear talk of the New Rolex Cases and Rolex saving money on the New Cases.
Can anyone address this specifically?
Especially in regards to the Pro series ,
and even a time line perhaps.

Cheers,

Mrdi

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Mrdi

I hear talk of the New Rolex Cases and Rolex saving money on the New Cases.
Can anyone address this specifically?
Especially in regards to the Pro series ,
and even a time line perhaps.

Cheers,

Mrdi

Sorry, not very clear....how can Rolex "save" on new cases...in which way? Could you elaborate please? And what exactly do you mean by "time line"?

Thanks - JJ

[Mrdi]

I'm not clear either JJ, that's what prompted the question, This is just hear say on my part; Quips I've gleaned from other websites.
However to elaborate, I read Rolex changed the cases and made them smaller to save money.
Note :this is not a statement of fact but a true inquiry!!
Does smaller equate to material and manufacturring savings?
Timeline:
When did the case changes take place, if at all.
I do know,the no pin hole visible from the side is relatively new.
When did that take place?
Two years ago?

Have there been other changes ?

Regards,

Mrdi

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Mrdi

I'm not clear either JJ, that's what prompted the question, This is just hear say on my part; Quips I've gleaned from other websites.
However to elaborate, I read Rolex changed the cases and made them smaller to save money.
Note :this is not a statement of fact but a true inquiry!!
Does smaller equate to material and manufacturring savings?
Timeline:
When did the case changes take place, if at all.
I do know,the no pin hole visible from the side is relatively new.
When did that take place?
Two years ago?

Have there been other changes ?

Regards,

Mrdi

For starters, I'll answer the question on the lug holes first. The holes on the sides of the sports range disappeared by the end of the Y-series...like around 2 years ago. Remember, models like the YM, DJs and DDs were mostly without holes anyway, except for the very old ones from the '80s.

When you say "smaller" not sure what you mean. DJs and DDs have always been a standard 36 mm. In fact, the newer cases are also 36 mm but made in such a way that they only "appear" larger.

The "boy's size" models like the Air King, Oyster Date have always been 34 mm and still are the same.

And, of course, the sports range has always been a round 40 mm.

Then, of course, there's a size which Rolex calls the "mid-size". This one's 31 mm and is sorta neither here nor there. Probably good for a lady with a large wrist or a man with pencil wrists!!

Other changes? The introduction of SEL bracelets - Solid End Links - in 2000 I think and better clasps on the Sub-date. Improvements in the Daytona clasp, introduciton of ALL solid links on the new Oyster and Jubilee bracelets.

I hope I've covered just about everything. If I've missed out something, then I'm sure someone here can fill in.

Cheers - JJ

[diablojota]

Don't forget the "love" that Rolex manufactures into each and every watch ;)

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by diablojota

Don't forget the "love" that Rolex manufactures into each and every watch ;)

Now you're talkin', Frank, now you're talkin'....you are my kinda guy...but NOT in that sense, pal!!

[C.J.]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Now you're talkin', Frank, now you're talkin'....you are my kinda guy...but NOT in that sense, pal!!

Careful, Frank. No more bending over in front of JJ Apparently, he has you confused with a sheep

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by C.J.

Careful, Frank. No more bending over in front of JJ Apparently, he has you confused with a sheep

[C.J.]

See what I mean, Frank? he didn't even deny it

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by C.J.

See what I mean, Frank? he didn't even deny it

[C.J.]

Uh Oh. Now he's jealous

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by C.J.

Uh Oh. Now he's jealous

...and you're a bloody tosser, you tosser!

[C.J.]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

...and you're a bloody tosser, you tosser!

I don't see why you're getting upset

[AJC]

Hey JJ,

Didn't we also discover some of the Y series have an additional marking to the serial number showing that it was a transitional no holes lug.

Aaron

[Mrdi]

Do the sheep prefer the ribbed Tikler?

[mailman]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Now you're talkin', Frank, now you're talkin'....you are my kinda guy...but NOT in that sense, pal!!

Be careful Frank. JJ has an affliction for my d!ck

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Sorry, not very clear....how can Rolex "save" on new cases...in which way? Could you elaborate please? And what exactly do you mean by "time line"?

Thanks - JJ

My impression is that one some models they have gone to a case similar to the YM. The lugs are different (not as chunky), and the case is a bit sleeker. This is just my impression reading some other sites, but I have honestly not been focused on Rolex at all when so many other nice watches are being released.

In terms of savings, I would assume people are referring to gold cases. Every little bit shaved off saves money on a gold case.......and don't forget the precious 904L stainless steel that is so superior to all other stainless steels.....OOOOOhhhhh yeah! LOL!

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by AJC

Hey JJ,

Didn't we also discover some of the Y series have an additional marking to the serial number showing that it was a transitional no holes lug.

Aaron

That's right, Aaron....the sports Rollies without holes have the letter "T" just after the model number like this....



As for the lugs, whereas the YM has shorter clinging lulgs, the others have elongated ones...see pics below!!

Here's the YM....notice how the SEL is extending beyond the lugs...



And now we have the Sub....note how the lugs are extending beyond the SEL...

[dman]

Originally Posted by diablojota

Don't forget the "love" that Rolex manufactures into each and every watch ;)

LOL!! Tounge in cheek but very funny Frank. Can a macine making "love" a watch?

[RobDad]

I had a new Turn-O-Graph for a few months last year before I flipped it. The case was very much in the style of the YM - polished all over, it seemed a lot slimmer with less heft to it. Personally I prefer the brushed lugs on my sub-date, and the classic looks of the Oyster case. The TOG was far too bling for my tastes, with the flashy polished centre links of the Oyster bracelet attracting far more scratches in a month than my Sub has in a year. The clasp looked terrible after about a week!

I really can't get to like the direction Rolex seem to be taking with their new watches. Maybe I grew up lusting after Rollies in the 80's (those damn National Geographic ads!), so I can't have a balanced opinion.

Sel's make sense, as does upgrading the clasps/solid centre links, as many people feel the old style are a little cheap-looking in an expensive watch. However, they seem to have added a lot to the cost of a new steel DJ, for example!

And why are Rolex putting triplock crowns on watches without upgraded cases? - the triplock is a functional waterproof crown, what's it doing on GMT's?

I love my sub as it is classically good-looking, each element of the design makes sense, with no 'fashionable' elements taking away from the purity of the design - isn't it this 'form following function' which has made it such a classic - as well as the GMT, Explorer etc?

Anyone else feel the same???!!!

[JJ Irani]

You've made a few good points there, Rob. As to why Rolex are now incorporating TRIPLOCK crowns on their GMT-II....well, I guess, for the very same reason they have it on their YM and Daytona models. Neither of these 2 have been advertised as diver watches and yet they are fitted with Triplock crowns.

In all fairness to the user, the Triplock does give added security and a much better feel when winding or having to screw down the crown as compared with the TWINLOCK crown.

I won't be surprised if slowly, slowly Rolex starts to introduce the Triplock on all of their newer models.

JJ