Why is the cyclops on the outside?

[koufax80]

So, I’m not sure whether to be embarrassed that I’ve never thought of this or embarrassed because everyone else already knows why, but why don’t they put the cyclops on the inside? I get that now it’s kind of a Rolex trademark, but wouldn’t a cyclops make more sense functionally on the inside? I’m sure a lens could be cut to make it work and it would allow for a perfectly flat crystal, less chance of hitting it. (Admittedly, I only thought of this because I saw a new watch that utilized it).

[kieselguhr]

Interference with the path of the hands

[Surge_23]

[hlash99]

Some Panerai’s have the cyclops on the inside

[WatchTimes]

Because it is...
It was likely the easiest way to accomplish the magnification when Rolex started and they have just kept it the same.

[brandrea]

My guess is that it keeps the profile of the watch slimmer feeling.

If it were on the inside of the crystal, the whole crystal would need to be taller

[Rocky Hockey]

Here is my ‘68 Douglas Worldtimer with the cyclopes on the inside. It worked so-so.

Oops. Having trouble uploading the picture.

Look up Wolbrook Watches for some modern examples.

[ltmgeller]

Originally Posted by kieselguhr

Interference with the path of the hands

This

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by hlash99

Some Panerai’s have the cyclops on the inside

And those crystals are nearly 3x as thick as a simple Rolex crystal, so that wouldn't work on most models.

[Gebbeth]

It's probably a combination of hand interference and easier production. I'm guessing it's much easier to place the cyclops on top of the crystal and adjust to line up with the date window (you could probably even do it after the watch is cased up, although I'm not sure how the production steps work), then underneath it (where I'm guessing you would have to place the cyclops before attaching to the case/bezel, and you would have to remove the crystal to adjust as necessary).

It's become iconic now so they're not going to change it lest they hear the collective complaints from the universe about Rolex going too far with their changes.

[HHIslander]

For the flex

[2loaded]

Originally Posted by HHIslander

For the flex

This forum gets funnier by the day !

[Norbert]

Reminds me of. Back when Rolex still had holes for the spring bars, the justification from Rolex diehards was crazy. Until Rolex did away with it, then they changed their tune.

[Cru Jones]

Originally Posted by hlash99

Some Panerai’s have the cyclops on the inside

Works for me

[KatGirl]

There is also the issue of a magnifying lens needing to be convex, so putting it on the outside of the crystal is just common sense.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Rocky Hockey]

Here’s my ‘68 Douglas Diver with inside cyclops.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRell]

So people know it is a Rolex, to put them in their place?

[77T]

It was the technology of the day.
Rolex intentionally carried it forward.

Rolex introduced the molded cyclops magnifier on the outside of their acrylic watch crystals in the 1950s.

Later, when they brought sapphire crystals out, it just seemed natural to slap one onto it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Mystro]

Technological limitations then and now iconic style identifier. Panerai has done the inverted cyclops perfectly.

[Steerpike999]

I have an old Tag Heuer that has the cyclops underneath the crystal.

[Curated]

Originally because that is what technology at the time allowed. Today its so that others know you are wearing a Rolex

[nighthawk77]

Originally Posted by Curated

Originally because that is what technology at the time allowed. Today its so that others know you are wearing a Rolex

This

[Colorado_kid]

And if the goal is to see the date window more clearly, couldn’t Rolex just make a larger date window? Like ze Germans do?

Mind blown…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crob1]

Reasons ranging from technology of the time to having a slimmer built which of course I prefer and it's also like a brand tag thing that's unique to the Rolex brand.

Sent from my A5_Pro using Tapatalk

[Old Expat Beast]

I think Rolex has painted itself into a corner with the Cyclops. It's a 70-year-old magnification aid originally devised for a tiny date-window on a 36mm watch, which only works if you look at it pretty much straight-on. Even at a very slight angle it just obscures the date.

On today’s sports models, Rolex could easily make the date larger and drop the Cyclops (I have had many other watches with larger, clearly legible dates, not requiring my reading glasses) but they seem to keep making the date deliberately small so that the “iconic” Cyclops seems more useful than it really is.

[7enderbender]

It’s so that you still have the option of removing the hideous blob.

[alexCoub]

Perhaps Rolex retains the Cyclops for marketing reasons. It has become a recognizable design element. Although I don't understand why Rolex continues to use the Cyclops either.

[Henrimontgomery]

Originally Posted by alexCoub

Perhaps Rolex retains the Cyclops for marketing reasons. It has become a recognizable design element. Although I don't understand why Rolex continues to use the Cyclops either.

How old are you? The older I get, the more grateful I am for cyclops.

[77T]

The Glashütte Original Sixties Panorama Date reference solved this years ago.



Rolex would need to eliminate all their lines of text to adopt that implementation.

But in the standard 3 o'clock position, they could just switch to dual wheels and modify the calibers.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[colonelpurple]

Originally Posted by brandrea

My guess is that it keeps the profile of the watch slimmer feeling.

If it were on the inside of the crystal, the whole crystal would need to be taller

no, it is perfectly possible to put it in the crystal with no extra effect.
In fact the Tag Heuer Aquaracer has an invert cyclops which does not protrude - the crystal is flat. It is a great innovation, in a lovely designed watch:

800TAG-Heuer-Aquaracer-Professional-300-Automatic-Blue-Mens-Watch-WBP201B.jpg