How could Rolex destroy their most beautiful Daytona watch? Speachless.

[Henrimontgomery]

Originally Posted by Fanofsteel

When Rolex released the 12XXXX Submariners, they uniformly made improvements in all aspects compared to the previous model. Definitely not the case with the Daytona. The steel ring interrupting the edge of the bezel does not look like a means to better protect the bezel from impacts, it looks like logistical corner-cutting to economize on the expense/difficulty/skill/labor required to have a full "infinity" edge using a more delicate material like ceramic. Agreed with Mystro that it's a step down in visual effect & aesthetics. Strange how Rolex could drop the ball so hard like this, given their obvious capability & previous display of good judgment on the evolution of their other sports models.

Kindred spirits, you and I.

There is zero angle in which this change makes Daytona better. Those saying this protects the bezel, let’s see all the cracked bezels by side shock during these 7 years? Let’s see Chanel J12 broken by impact?

This is a decision that makes sense, only in the excel spreadsheets stored on Rolex’s internal sharepoints.

Daytona would have been way better with the previous bezel and new indexes.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Fanofsteel

When Rolex released the 12XXXX Submariners, they uniformly made improvements in all aspects compared to the previous model. Definitely not the case with the Daytona. The steel ring interrupting the edge of the bezel does not look like a means to better protect the bezel from impacts, it looks like logistical corner-cutting to economize on the expense/difficulty/skill/labor required to have a full "infinity" edge using a more delicate material like ceramic. Agreed with Mystro that it's a step down in visual effect & aesthetics. Strange how Rolex could drop the ball so hard like this, given their obvious capability & previous display of good judgment on the evolution of their other sports models.

Originally Posted by omar-rye

How did you come up with the conclusion that it is logistically more complicated to manufacture one over the other?

I'm interested too.

The 12's insert still has to have a uniformly perfect inner and outer edge. It is most likely significantly thinner being an insert and therefore more fragile to work with.

A 1 piece ceramic bezel will most certainly have a lower material cost than the 2 piece PM bezels and likely lower manufacturing cost than all the 2 piece bezels regardless of whether in SS, AU or PT.

It is highly unlikely that the change was made for cost or corner cutting.

My own view is that the change was made for changes sake, but with a nod to the old bakelite bezel Daytonas.

I also suspect that to all but the most ardent enthusiast/collector, the new 2 piece bezels will look more "finished" than the one piece ceramic bezels. More "luxury" if you will.

[Michael N Q8]

I don't think the look is completely ruined with the new bezel design, but in an ideal world, I would like the case and dial of the new model with the bezel of the previous one. The new markers and sub dial sizes are good IMO.

[garyk]

I keep looking at mine now that the new one has been announced. Side by side, I’ll take mine over the new one.

[Driver8]

I honestly can't see "cost cutting" as the reason for the bezel ring change!

Seriously guys? Do we really think that retooling the manufacturing process to save a few cubic mm of ceramic, and then still having to create and machine a new part in metal, plus a new insert out of ceramic, is a cost saving measure on a watch they already sell for many many times the actual manufacturing cost?

If the global cost of ceramic (if indeed there is such a thing!) shot up, I'm pretty sure Rolex could've just slapped an extra £500 on the RRP to cover it, and no-one would've batted an eyelid.

It's nothing more than an aesthetic change to make it look both different to the outgoing model, and as a nod to certain older references. That's all.

[rolexgs]

Originally Posted by Driver8

I honestly can't see "cost cutting" as the reason for the bezel ring change!

Seriously guys? Do we really think that retooling the manufacturing process to save a few cubic mm of ceramic, and then still having to create and machine a new part in metal, plus a new insert out of ceramic, is a cost saving measure on a watch they already sell for many many times the actual manufacturing cost?

If the global cost of ceramic (if indeed there is such a thing!) shot up, I'm pretty sure Rolex could've just slapped an extra £500 on the RRP to cover it, and no-one would've batted an eyelid.

It's nothing more than an aesthetic change to make it look both different to the outgoing model, and as a nod to certain older references. That's all.

not to mention more PM required to manufacture the bezel on OF daytona models, definitely not a cost cutting way.

[mykii]

Originally Posted by rolexgs

not to mention more PM required to manufacture the bezel on OF daytona models, definitely not a cost cutting way.

The amount of PM is negligible if they are capacity constrained on ceramic production, of which some needs to be reserved for repairs/service. This applies to ceramic across the industry. It makes sense.

[rolexgs]

Originally Posted by mykii

The amount of PM is negligible if they are capacity constrained on ceramic production, of which some needs to be reserved for repairs/service. This applies to ceramic across the industry. It makes sense.

you mean ceramic is more precious than PM?

[1665fan]

New one is better……..simple

[4 Aussies]

Originally Posted by garyk

I keep looking at mine now that the new one has been announced. Side by side, I’ll take mine over the new one.

I'm with you, Gary. Either way, we are in the game, not easy grabbing this Bad Boy at MSRP. Once I see the new one in the flesh, if I like it, I will do some AD arm twisting again and score it. One thing is certain, I don't see myself ever parting with a SS Daytona, in my book more is always better in this regard. Cheers to the SS Daytona!!

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Devildog

I'm interested too.

The 12's insert still has to have a uniformly perfect inner and outer edge. It is most likely significantly thinner being an insert and therefore more fragile to work with.

A 1 piece ceramic bezel will most certainly have a lower material cost than the 2 piece PM bezels and likely lower manufacturing cost than all the 2 piece bezels regardless of whether in SS, AU or PT.

It is highly unlikely that the change was made for cost or corner cutting.

My own view is that the change was made for changes sake, but with a nod to the old bakelite bezel Daytonas.

I also suspect that to all but the most ardent enthusiast/collector, the new 2 piece bezels will look more "finished" than the one piece ceramic bezels. More "luxury" if you will.

Originally Posted by Driver8

I honestly can't see "cost cutting" as the reason for the bezel ring change!

Seriously guys? Do we really think that retooling the manufacturing process to save a few cubic mm of ceramic, and then still having to create and machine a new part in metal, plus a new insert out of ceramic, is a cost saving measure on a watch they already sell for many many times the actual manufacturing cost?

If the global cost of ceramic (if indeed there is such a thing!) shot up, I'm pretty sure Rolex could've just slapped an extra £500 on the RRP to cover it, and no-one would've batted an eyelid.

It's nothing more than an aesthetic change to make it look both different to the outgoing model, and as a nod to certain older references. That's all.

Have to agree.

You either like the new aesthetic or you don’t, simple as that.

If Rolex were into cost cutting, they’d just have left the old movement in the watch as well

[BDII]

I love the updates. Luxify.de has the best images of it I’ve seen. In their instagram they have a great wrist roll too.

I’m on the list! Hoping to get it for my 35th birthday in November.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by BDII

I love the updates. Those thicker crown guards really give it a more beefy look.

[Eric-London]

I'm reserving judgement until I see it in the flesh.

[Bigsoftee]

Really prefer the new one, the subdials are so much better.

[chris007]

Hi guys,

Other than the Daytona, how many Rolexes with a ceramic insert don't have a steel ring around the ceramic bezel?

The answer is very simple: NONE!

I think that's why they added it, to create uniformity throughout the collection of "sports" models.

[Phrank]

Originally Posted by tekno

The Daytona was ruined when they started using ceramic for the bezel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

"Ruined" is a bridge way too far in my opinion, but for me, I felt the ceramic bezel removed the classic Daytona look with something that looked slapped on. I bought my 116520 in 2018, did not like the ceramic bezel at all and never considered purchasing it.

I mean, it's the "The Daytona", ceramic bezel or not, they are gorgeous watches all around - period.

The new one, for me, the bezel looks properly integrated into the watch and reaches out to the vintage Daytona past, it makes sense that it's there now at least.

There was a member here who purchased an aftermarket Daytona bezel and swapped it out for the aluminum on his 116520 - insta 500!

I grabbed one as well, and just dropped it on top for a pic.

[Big Tex Rolex]

At least they did not add a Date !!!! Thank you !!!

I like both, the 11 Series and the 12 Series.

The Bezel Guard is growing on me on the Black Dial.

I kind of like an all Black Bezel on the White Dial, but I like both iterations, the 11 and 12.

I do like the symmetry of 4 equal sized lugs.

As for a choice, for me, 11 or 12 … it will depend on the size on my wrist, i.e., TBD.

[Bizcut1]

Can't get one anyway...why the kerfuffle?

[Turb0wned]

White dial looks better on the old one, black dial looks better on the new one.

[Pablito]

By the way, any thoughts on new TT references? Am I the only one to like them way better than previous ones? The dial modifications suit them very nicely, particularly on the champagne dial which smells a fresh 16523 perfume ehehe.

[braaad17]

Originally Posted by BDII

I love the updates. Luxify.de has the best images of it I’ve seen. In their instagram they have a great wrist roll too.

I’m on the list! Hoping to get it for my 35th birthday in November.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I prefer the older ceramic white dial over this. New one just seems to have a lot more negative space and not as balanced as before.

The white gold outlining the hour markers also seem much thinner in this update, thus producing less contrast between the white dial and the chromalight inside the hour markers. The gold in the hour markers have a sort of paper clip thin look compared to the now discontinued model. This plus the now thinner black subdials make this model quite white heavy compared to before, which has a more balanced black to white ratio imho.

I do prefer the newer version in black dial though. Solves the negative space problem of the new white dial.

[Pablito]

Originally Posted by Turb0wned

White dial looks better on the old one, black dial looks better on the new one.

Total agree

[Phrank]

Originally Posted by Bizcut1

Can't get one anyway...why the kerfuffle?

...................

[bp1000]

Old white
New black

I’ve registered for the new black. Think it looks great.

Dont ask me why but I prefer the old white more.

[jb335]

Originally Posted by Turb0wned

White dial looks better on the old one, black dial looks better on the new one.

Based on pics alone, I agree with this.

That outer metal ring on the black dial bezel lightens it just a tad, for the better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wiem0014]

Count me in as someone that prefers the new model. Right away I liked the thinner subdials and really like the look of the steel ring around the bezel as well. I also much prefer the side profile because I don't think elegance was ever what I was looking for in a sports watch. Can't wait to see it in the metal.

[atxwatch]

With the case change and metal around the bezel, it looks like a GMTII with pushers now. Meh.

[BJHofkin]

It's so interesting – based on photos I have the EXACT opposite view as a bunch of folks ITT:

Old black, new white

I guess the world would be a more boring place if we all agreed! ��

[MILGAUSS88]

I thought the OP just found out that Rolex has been putting on a Ceramic bezel.
I much prefer the all metal bezels on the older models.