Is Rolex more durable than other watch brands?

[Wesley Crusher]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

RM is definitely more durable than Rolex

And this is based on....?

[ras47]

For long-term durability they're great, especially Rolex's diving/sport watches. But for pure durability I'd give the nod to Seiko.

[beshannon]

I would guess that would depend on how each watch is being treated

[Manofsteelpt]

Originally Posted by HorologyK

My Patek 5167 stopped working for no reason after 18 months. Enough said.

There's a thread about a DD40 that stopped (also for no reason) after a month. So, the PP lasted 18 times longer than the Rolex. Enough said?

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

And this is based on....?

Easy answer my friend. RM was founded in 1999 and the first watch produced went on sale in 2001. Not many companies can say the first watch ever produced is still working.

[V10K]

I am not familiar with RM, but their designs seem to be more contemporary avant garde. It's not something I am that into. I like neo traditional with a classic elegant flavor.

The original question was asked because I am having a hard time finding watches that I can be into. Most are fashion pieces as opposed to watch for daily wear (I think you guys refer to it as tool watches, which sounds like Home Improvement to me). I don't know why but Omega watches have never really appealed to me.

[Chiboy]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

I would agree but i would say Rolex makes tool watches that have since become "luxury" watches over time and due to perception with little change to the design.One day they were tool watches and the next they were luxury, but its basically the same watch. Tool is in their DNA, where as AP or Patek never really were in the tool watch game to begin with and were luxury from the start. Apples and Oranges.

I don't consider Rolex to be a luxury watch. Are they expensive, Yes, absolutely but that does not necessarily make them luxury. They are an expensive tool. I love Rolex so its not to be taken as a put down of the brand at all.

I think Rolex on TRF is not a "luxury " watch in the same was that the California may not be considered an exotic car on the Ferrari forums.

<rolling eyes>

[DougC]

Rolex sub and especially the deep sea are the most durable watches made, I have destroyed several diving watches when I was a Navy Deep Sea Diver until purchasing a sub date that I wore every day for more than 30 years, one that didn't withstand the abuse of my occupation was a Seiko diving watch that fell apart in less than 6 months, I actually wore my watches while working at depth conducting demanding tasks.

[speedmaster73]

Originally Posted by V10K

Are Rolex watches more durable than other brands?

I like the designs of JLC, Patek, AP but I am not sure if they are as durable/long lasting as Rolex. I like something that is industrial strength. I don't want a fashion piece that is going to break on my wrist if I am not careful. For some reason I don't have that fear with my Rolex, Rado Ceramic or Cartier Tank but I do have it for other brands. I am just wondering if its something inside my head or is there a real difference?

I have seen that JLC charges alot for repairs as I imagine the other exclusive watch manufacturers do. I would be irritated if I was repairing my watch every 5 years, once in 10 is ok for me.

Thanks for any sincere advice!

Rolex & Seiko are the heavyweights of 'durability'

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by Manofsteelpt

There's a thread about a DD40 that stopped (also for no reason) after a month. So, the PP lasted 18 times longer than the Rolex. Enough said?

If you believe the guy who has one post and no pictures.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by speedmaster73

Rolex & Seiko are the heavyweights of 'durability'

What do you think of the new samurai?

[lhawli]

Originally Posted by Syed117

My dad has two Omegas from 1967 and 1971.

The 67 runs about 15 seconds a day and the 71 about 10.

Neither have ever been serviced.

Unless there is some serious impact or other damage, I think most watches from good brands (especially Rolex) will stand the test of time.

My father also has an omega from '81 and you should see that thing - you would think that it's been through WW1 & 2 and is running strong. It's gaining about 16s/d based on my timegrapher but that is impressive.

I say both omega and rolex are robust - but hey, so is a g-shock!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[kilyung]

More durable? Casios are more so. However I'd rank it pretty high along with Omega and Ball as well as some others.

[teo]

Sorry double post

[teo]

Some people wear Rolex for more than 20years without servicing the watch and is still running fine. The same cannot be said for patek, AP or any other brands with automatic inhouse movement.

[Rebel]

[lhawli]

Originally Posted by teo

Some people wear Rolex for more than 20years without servicing the watch and is still running fine. The same cannot be said for patek, AP or any other brands with automatic inhouse movement.

The same cannot be said about ETA?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[epc2]

I had a 16570 that I sold a few months ago , I bought it new in 2003 and never serviced it, It was keeping good time , never had any issues with it.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by lhawli

The same cannot be said about ETA?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

you can knock them out of regulation, any lever adjusted movement for that matter. I have several times on an old chronomat.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Chiboy

I think Rolex on TRF is not a "luxury " watch in the same was that the California may not be considered an exotic car on the Ferrari forums.

<rolling eyes>

i just don't always equate expensive with luxury. If i was a mountaineer and i had expensive north face gear (or whatever expensive brand they use these days) I would not say i had a luxury jacket or sleeping bag because it cost more than regular gear. I would say i had high quality items so i don't freeze to death. I feel the same way about Rolex with watches.

Luxury and price don't always go together although a lot of people probably don't share my view. Just because it isn't luxury doesn't make it less of a watch or "cheap".

The DD and others might be, i don't have those so I'm not speaking about them. Im referring to GMT, Explorer, Sub, Sea Dweller and even the Daytona, ETC. The stuff the brand is the most closely associated with over time.

[dave023]

Since we're on a rolexforum isn't almost everything better about Rolex

I'd say, Rolex = Omega on this topic.

[faz]

Originally Posted by V10K

I am not familiar with RM, but their designs seem to be more contemporary avant garde. It's not something I am that into. I like neo traditional with a classic elegant flavor.

The original question was asked because I am having a hard time finding watches that I can be into. Most are fashion pieces as opposed to watch for daily wear (I think you guys refer to it as tool watches, which sounds like Home Improvement to me). I don't know why but Omega watches have never really appealed to me.

I share similar feelings towards other brands especially Omega that I have tried to like. I have come close to buying an Omega a couple of times, but then I ask myself would this watch get any wrist time with my Rolex around, and the answer is no, so I move on.

Probably due to me being at my WIS infancy still, and being spoiled by wearing my bluesy for 9 consecutive years as my only watch, day in day out, and doing everything with it on and still not needing to get it serviced 9 years later.... I can't bring myself to spending large amount of money on fashion watches that I hear are not as reliable and hard working as Rolex is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Quailhunter]

The OP's question cannot be answered unless there has been a scientifically conducted long term tests of multiple watch brands with multiple watches of each brand. Everything else is just speculation.

[faz]

Originally Posted by dave023

Since we're on a rolexforum isn't almost everything better about Rolex



I'd say, Rolex = Omega on this topic.

Sure.

But no one on BMW forum, for example, boasts about reliability of that brand, instead they justify their purchase on performance, luxury, technology and other attributes that define BMW. Quite the opposite happens on a Honda forum though, and people there discussing reliability of their brand wouldn't make it any less truthful.

Since I don't have the time and energy to frequent other watch forums, I ask: do people on other luxury watch forums consider that brand to be the most durable??? Or do they consider it to be better in other aspects and not necessarily reliability??




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[V10K]

Originally Posted by dave023

Since we're on a rolexforum isn't almost everything better about Rolex

I'd say, Rolex = Omega on this topic.

I went to Omega's website to see if I found any of the watches desirable. None of them seem remotely attractive. Are they durable because the movements are shock proof or it some very high grade steel the bracelets and bodies are made out of?

[meganfox17]

Originally Posted by faz

Or do they consider it to be better in other aspects and not necessarily reliability??

On the Omega forum,it's more brand focus, discussing about the History ,the present and future directions and how the darling of the Swatch group can further improve in the marketing and technical aspects.The OF boasts two distinguished gentlemen just to name a few : Mr Robert Jan-Broer of Fratellowatches with Speedy Tuesday and the brilliant watchmaker and watch repairman, Mr Al Jensky of Archer Watches

Originally Posted by faz

Since I don't have the time and energy to frequent other watch forums, I ask: do people on other luxury watch forums consider that brand to be the most durable???

Nope. Never the case on the Omega forum

[meganfox17]

Originally Posted by V10K

I went to Omega's website to see if I found any of the watches desirable. None of them seem remotely attractive. Are they durable because the movements are shock proof or it some very high grade steel the bracelets and bodies are made out of?

WW. I'm speechless..

[asiparks]

define durable ? Do you mean dependable with normal wear between services ? Or are you regularly playing golf, climbing/diving etc ?
Like many others, I've got Seiko's going on 30 years and working fine. IWC also make some very robust timepieces, particularly the Ingenieur and the Aquatimer lines. I would also consider Sinn as extremely rugged and well engineered. I have a Lemania based 142 Spacelab from the 80's, again, still going strong after one trip back to replace a chrono pusher that came off when I dropped it...
I believe the Explorer II is the most "rugged" of Rolex's current offerings.

[V10K]

I am going to try to make sense of the Seiko watches. I have heard some people compare the quality to Rolex but I am not seeing it yet.

Megan: Sorry, I am heathen when it comes to watches - still learning on my WIS journey.

asi: Durable means two things to me, one is the ability to take a hit, shock and a fall. Second, not to require much service/maintenance. I am not interested in plastic watches.

Some of the brands you mentioned due have an image of being tough and reliable. Unfortunately, they are too modern for my taste. I prefer timeless elegance and history. I do like some modern pieces but usually deeply rooted in tradition. Also, not watches costing high 5 figures - something attainable.

I do agree that the explorer ii is the most rugged Rolex currently being offered. I have been looking at it on and off repeatedly. Its toughness appeals to me but the watch doesn't suit my overall look. I like to be more classy and refined and thats why I have 2 DJ's currently.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by V10K

I am going to try to make sense of the Seiko watches. I have heard some people compare the quality to Rolex but I am not seeing it yet.

Megan: Sorry, I am heathen when it comes to watches - still learning on my WIS journey.

asi: Durable means two things to me, one is the ability to take a hit, shock and a fall. Second, not to require much service/maintenance. I am not interested in plastic watches.

Some of the brands you mentioned due have an image of being tough and reliable. Unfortunately, they are too modern for my taste. I prefer timeless elegance and history. I do like some modern pieces but usually deeply rooted in tradition. Also, not watches costing high 5 figures - something attainable.

I do agree that the explorer ii is the most rugged Rolex currently being offered. I have been looking at it on and off repeatedly. Its toughness appeals to me but the watch doesn't suit my overall look. I like to be more classy and refined and thats why I have 2 DJ's currently.

By your definition a Rolex is very durable. The fact that they look great and can feel very luxurious, esp the PM models, is a great bonus.