Daytona Puzzle

[nuts070]

I’ve started my Rolex journey last year when I thought that the time has finally arrived for me to own one. I thought that one of my life’s missions has been done and there is no fitting reward for me other than indulging again in this crazy worold of watch collecting. I’ve travelled through a date just, gmt tt, subs a ym, gmt blnr, and now next in line with a blro. After that blro, the next logical acquisition for us Rolex WISes is the daytona. It is a puzzle for me in terms of desirability yet it is the most coveted reference of Rolex currently all over the planet. Yet if one thinks, it is of marginal legibility specially to those with failing eyesight, with a barely usable complication at its price point in the open market.

Without talking about hype, what is the allure of the daytona?

[Etschell]

History and prominence. Same with most Rolex excluding the ym ii and the sky dweller.

Legibility issues are a laughable complaint in a world of phones. It is sort of like pcl complaints.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by nuts070

I’ve started my Rolex journey last year when I thought that the time has finally arrived for me to own one. I thought that one of my life’s missions has been done and there is no fitting reward for me other than indulging again in this crazy worold of watch collecting. I’ve travelled through a date just, gmt tt, subs a ym, gmt blnr, and now next in line with a blro. After that blro, the next logical acquisition for us Rolex WISes is the daytona. It is a puzzle for me in terms of desirability yet it is the most coveted reference of Rolex currently all over the planet. Yet if one thinks, it is of marginal legibility specially to those with failing eyesight, with a barely usable complication at its price point in the open market.

Without talking about hype, what is the allure of the daytona?

Afraid today many buy the Internet hype over the watch just to wear the hype thinking they have something rare and unique. Myself was never a fan of the modern day Daytona even less of the just cosmetic changed ceramic.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by nuts070

I’ve started my Rolex journey last year when I thought that the time has finally arrived for me to own one. I thought that one of my life’s missions has been done and there is no fitting reward for me other than indulging again in this crazy worold of watch collecting. I’ve travelled through a date just, gmt tt, subs a ym, gmt blnr, and now next in line with a blro. After that blro, the next logical acquisition for us Rolex WISes is the daytona. It is a puzzle for me in terms of desirability yet it is the most coveted reference of Rolex currently all over the planet. Yet if one thinks, it is of marginal legibility specially to those with failing eyesight, with a barely usable complication at its price point in the open market.

Without talking about hype, what is the allure of the daytona?

Mainly hype. And I own one and used to own a zenith Daytona, so I’m no hater. But I have a far far more balanced opinion than most here on this subject. Yes the legibility is horrible for the subdials. I mean there is not even enough hash marks to read them correctly.

Why I keep it is this. It’s water proof, perfect for my vacations. Versatile, (I have a 116520 so less sporty than the versions with the dinner plate material) can look great with shorts or a jacket. Perfect proportions, the slightly under 40mm size, extremely thin, very comfortable. The subdials and dial are very well balanced. And I can use the chrono function which I need for my job, if I need to, just with significant difficulty.

Now look at the competition. I was Looking at chronos the other week (iwc, breitling, Tudor, many others) most were excessively thick, too large, too sporty, and lacking in versatility. I mean one was a bruguet (not sure on the spelling there) and was massively thick. The others are not water proof at all. The only real competition would be the vc overseas chrono, but I can’t get past the bezel.

The hype is too much though. I would put it 3rd maybe 4th of all time
Chronos, 1) speedy pro, 2) navitimer, 3) zenith , maybe then Daytona.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by Etschell

History and prominence. Same with most Rolex excluding the ym ii and the sky dweller.

Legibility issues are a laughable complaint in a world of phones. It is sort of like pcl complaints.

Yes we have phones. But a watch that can’t be read accurately is simply adornment for the wrist. Like a car in the driveway that can’t drive.

[Art 1]

Originally Posted by nuts070

I’ve started my Rolex journey last year when I thought that the time has finally arrived for me to own one. I thought that one of my life’s missions has been done and there is no fitting reward for me other than indulging again in this crazy worold of watch collecting. I’ve travelled through a date just, gmt tt, subs a ym, gmt blnr, and now next in line with a blro. After that blro, the next logical acquisition for us Rolex WISes is the daytona. It is a puzzle for me in terms of desirability yet it is the most coveted reference of Rolex currently all over the planet. Yet if one thinks, it is of marginal legibility specially to those with failing eyesight, with a barely usable complication at its price point in the open market.

Without talking about hype, what is the allure of the daytona?

I had one and wore it daily for years. It was very comfortable. But it was very very difficult to read, and the chrono was so hard to read it was useless. I had a white dial SS version.

[hgbayoud]

Hype ... sold mine white SS 2001 edition and bought the GMT 2 Pepsi and I love it. At the end it is your preference, does it sing for you? Good luck

[Jona]

I had the SS bezel version twice and sold them both times. Now I have the ceramic bezel which I like much more. But to be totally honest, if they were in plentiful supply I would not have wanted it as much. Logically or not, there is some appeal to having something in short supply and great demand. Still, I liked it enough on its own merits especially at MSRP.

I will never pay over MSRP however.

[Roger Lococco]

It’s a trophy. But a very nice one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Calatrava r]

There is no issue telling the time on a Daytona. Some of the dials have hash marks on the sub-dials which are hard to see in dimmer lighting and make telling timed time difficult. The other big draw back is the pushers are screwed in which may look neat but suggests the user should remove the watch to use the chronograph. Obviously, many wearers never do this and are very careful not to exert too much lateral pressure when unscrewing and screwing down the pushers. Sort of like not winding a watch when being worn due to the lateral pressure placed on the crown assembly.

[johnjm]

How bad is everyone's eye sight? The way this thread is going it seems that most are blind.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[BT1985]

First of all, the hype is obviously a large driving factor in the secondary price and I would argue most people buy one as merely a status symbol.

That said, in my opinion the Daytona is worthy of almost all of the hype as a watch enthusiast. From an aesthetics standpoint I feel like it threads the needle perfectly between staying true to its heritage and incorporating modern technology. The case and lugs are thin and it wears like a 5 digit.

The most impressive thing about the Daytona in my opinion is the movement. Aside from the fact that it is an extremely thin vertical clutch chronograph, Rolex crafted arguably the most efficient and service friendly automatic chronograph in existence. For example, the 4130 uses 12 different screws vs. more than 40 found in its predecessor, the 4030, and it uses 20% fewer parts overall. It has a serviceable vertical clutch, which means it can be disassembled and repaired whereas most all vertical clutches found in competitors (if not all), the watchmaker must merely put the untouched clutch (which will eventually fail) back in after servicing the watch. Additionally, due to the simplification of the counter system and freeing up space, it allowed them to increase the size of the mainspring barrel to give it more power reserve (70+ hours).

To me the Daytona is a quintessential Rolex because of how it showcases Rolex’s ability to take an existing technology and perfect it without any superfluous elements.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[locutus49]

I sold my Platona because legibility: as I got older my eyesight is getting worse. I traded for a Smurf (and cash) and could not be happier.

Love the Platona but had trouble reading the time. If you have good eyesight then I highly recommend the Daytona.

[spacedinvader]

Originally Posted by BT1985

First of all, the hype is obviously a large driving factor in the secondary price and I would argue most people buy one as merely a status symbol.

That said, in my opinion the Daytona is worthy of almost all of the hype as a watch enthusiast. From an aesthetics standpoint I feel like it threads the needle perfectly between staying true to its heritage and incorporating modern technology. The case and lugs are thin and it wears like a 5 digit.

The most impressive thing about the Daytona in my opinion is the movement. Aside from the fact that it is an extremely thin vertical clutch chronograph, Rolex crafted arguably the most efficient and service friendly automatic chronograph in existence. For example, the 4130 uses 12 different screws vs. more than 40 found in its predecessor, the 4030, and it uses 20% fewer parts overall. It has a serviceable vertical clutch, which means it can be disassembled and repaired whereas most all vertical clutches found in competitors (if not all), the watchmaker must merely put the untouched clutch (which will eventually fail) back in after servicing the watch. Additionally, due to the simplification of the counter system and freeing up space, it allowed them to increase the size of the mainspring barrel to give it more power reserve (70+ hours).

To me the Daytona is a quintessential Rolex because of how it showcases Rolex’s ability to take an existing technology and perfect it without any superfluous elements.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Very nice answer and well explained.

[jvb.nc]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

There is no issue telling the time on a Daytona.

thank you. +12638492637384

[BT1985]

Originally Posted by spacedinvader

Very nice answer and well explained.

Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nuts070]

Originally Posted by BT1985

First of all, the hype is obviously a large driving factor in the secondary price and I would argue most people buy one as merely a status symbol.

That said, in my opinion the Daytona is worthy of almost all of the hype as a watch enthusiast. From an aesthetics standpoint I feel like it threads the needle perfectly between staying true to its heritage and incorporating modern technology. The case and lugs are thin and it wears like a 5 digit.

The most impressive thing about the Daytona in my opinion is the movement. Aside from the fact that it is an extremely thin vertical clutch chronograph, Rolex crafted arguably the most efficient and service friendly automatic chronograph in existence. For example, the 4130 uses 12 different screws vs. more than 40 found in its predecessor, the 4030, and it uses 20% fewer parts overall. It has a serviceable vertical clutch, which means it can be disassembled and repaired whereas most all vertical clutches found in competitors (if not all), the watchmaker must merely put the untouched clutch (which will eventually fail) back in after servicing the watch. Additionally, due to the simplification of the counter system and freeing up space, it allowed them to increase the size of the mainspring barrel to give it more power reserve (70+ hours).

To me the Daytona is a quintessential Rolex because of how it showcases Rolex’s ability to take an existing technology and perfect it without any superfluous elements.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thank you for your insight. This fascination with its machine and maybe the history of the reference is a good place to start where I can appreciate the reference. But not yet. Still have the BLRO to go after.

[stefanweei]

I loved the Daytona as soon as I got into watches. This one before the crazy hype of today. I even love the TT ones and I'm very satisfied with my choice. 116503 with the blue racing dial. It's just so badass.

[MTdweller]

I never bought into the hype or wanted a Daytona until they released the ceramic versions a few years ago. I am patiently waiting until I can get one at MSRP, which may never happen (but I’m in no hurry).

[Mr DateJust]

It’s a nice watch and a nice looking chrono. However I sold mine after owning for a very short time. Only Rolex I had without a date and it drove me crazy. Plus it is a hard watch to read. Nothing against it but I bought into the hype a bit. It’s just not for me. I know some love them.

[Roger Lococco]

Originally Posted by stefanweei

I loved the Daytona as soon as I got into watches. This one before the crazy hype of today. I even love the TT ones and I'm very satisfied with my choice. 116503 with the blue racing dial. It's just so badass.

This is one of my favorite watches out there. I hate TT watches, but love this watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[djgallo]

I think it is the style and design elements that attract me. It is a classic. I find it comfortable to wear in any setting. Never have a problem reading the time of day. In the rare instance that I need to time an event, I just remove the watch from my wrist put my readers on and get r done! Love this watch, what more can I say!