The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19 January 2021, 01:30 AM   #91
Jack T
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Real Name: Jack
Location: The Triangle
Watch: Several
Posts: 6,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphadweller View Post
Not the case in the car industry, telecommunications, food, drugs etc. They issue recalls when something's wrong. I for one would much rather see Rolex be honest about it and explain what's going on. It's not about having problems, that could happen to any company. It's about how they communicate with the public and fix things rather than hidding them away.
Those are matters of public safety, with tens of thousands of units of product on the road or potentially ingested. And they are compelled to do so by government agencies and consumer advocates. Big difference from a shiny watch.

Let’s face it, no company wants to publicly admit they’ve made a faulty batch.
__________________
Sub 116613 LN; GMT 116710 LN; Sinn 104R;
Exp 214270; GS SBGM221; Omega AT
Jack T is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 02:17 AM   #92
DJ2020
"TRF" Member
 
DJ2020's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Real Name: Wayne
Location: NC
Watch: 226570
Posts: 3,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack T View Post
Those are matters of public safety, with tens of thousands of units of product on the road or potentially ingested. And they are compelled to do so by government agencies and consumer advocates. Big difference from a shiny watch.

Let’s face it, no company wants to publicly admit they’ve made a faulty batch.
Scrupulous attention to detail, "every watch timed to -2/+2" I don't believe it at all. To many problems as of late. Omega is looking better and better to me.
DJ2020 is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 03:01 AM   #93
TswaneNguni
"TRF" Member
 
TswaneNguni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: .
Watch: Daytonas/Subs/GMTs
Posts: 12,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocOc View Post
They kept the damn movement for thirty years,...
Damn fine movement !!
TswaneNguni is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 03:23 AM   #94
Jack T
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Real Name: Jack
Location: The Triangle
Watch: Several
Posts: 6,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ2020 View Post
Scrupulous attention to detail, "every watch timed to -2/+2" I don't believe it at all. To many problems as of late. Omega is looking better and better to me.
I’ve always liked Omega, two or three really great models. I have a ten year old Planet Ocean that is still near perfect.

Like most companies, maybe even more so, Rolex wants their customers to be satisfied (and their reputation intact); I’m confident if this movement is a real problem they will fix it.
__________________
Sub 116613 LN; GMT 116710 LN; Sinn 104R;
Exp 214270; GS SBGM221; Omega AT
Jack T is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 05:38 AM   #95
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 7,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiBoost View Post
Do we have agreed upon numbers for what constitutes "too low" of an amplitude? I have a 2 week old 2020 Sub (126613, bought from AD, taken from plastic "coffin" so never even touched or wound at the dealer before I got it) and I have worn it probably 5 or 6 times in that period. It has stopped a few times as I don't use a winder. Tonight, after wearing for several hours I wound it fully (75 winds) and put it on the timegrapher. After changing to each position I let it sit for 2 minutes, then monitored it for another minute keeping track of the ranges of both time error and amplitude. This is what I got:

DU: +2 to +3 s/d, 256-262 deg
CU: -3 to -6 s/d, 208-218 deg
DD: +2 to +4 s/d, 250-257 deg
CD: +0 to -2 s/d, 216-224 deg

Lift angle was set to 53 degrees as specified by SearChart in the other post.

I'll let it sit and check tomorrow night to see where things are at. But I've seen others posting that amplitudes around 215-220 are not good, but is that only for the dial up position? And even then, do we really know that to be true? Data from others seems to suggest that as amplitude drops over time so does accuracy. But if I'm still averaging +/- 2 s/d with a 210ish amplitude in certain positions, is that necessarily a cause for concern? And is there actually an appreciable break-in for these things? Is it possible amplitude could actually be higher in a month?

The only reason I care about these answers so much is that I'm on track to buy 3 3235 powered references this year. If this movement is really going to prove to be a maintenance headache I really don't think I want to head down that path, times 3... So I'm trying to get a feel for all this while I'm only on the hook for one of these things :)
It's a wise approach on you part as one needs to enjoy their watch or watches to the full.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread and all that.
There's plenty of time to sit back and assess
Dirt is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 05:40 AM   #96
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 7,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack T View Post
I’ve always liked Omega, two or three really great models. I have a ten year old Planet Ocean that is still near perfect.

Like most companies, maybe even more so, Rolex wants their customers to be satisfied (and their reputation intact); I’m confident if this movement is a real problem they will fix it.
I hope you're right because it looks like Rolex are well and truly in for a penny, in for a pound on this one and it's looking like a quich way to piss a great reputation away that's been built up over many decades
Dirt is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 05:47 AM   #97
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 7,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack T View Post
Those are matters of public safety, with tens of thousands of units of product on the road or potentially ingested. And they are compelled to do so by government agencies and consumer advocates. Big difference from a shiny watch.

Let’s face it, no company wants to publicly admit they’ve made a faulty batch.
Besides, history is littered with examples of engines that were dogs along with cars that were dogs and they passed into oblivion like all the others, just quicker.
Some were and are memorable for all the right reasons too
The same with watches
Dirt is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 05:47 AM   #98
alphadweller
"TRF" Member
 
alphadweller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Real Name: Vic
Location: Spain
Watch: SD43
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack T View Post
Let’s face it, no company wants to publicly admit they’ve made a faulty batch.
That's true, especially when it looks like it's not just a batch but affects older and more recent 3235s...

Many owners wear their watches on rotation and will probably never notice the problem if they don't pay attention, unless the watch starts losing minutes a day. I think this is the main reason why we are not seeing more owners coming forward. There's also fear that talking about it might cause value to fall in the preowned market.

I think we're only seeing the tip of the iceberg here. The question is how Rolex address the problem going forward, whether they carry on with their temporary and pointless fix or if they finally come up with a permanent solution. The 3255 has been in the market since 2015 with the 3235 being released shortly after, you'd think they've had time to take care of the teething issues .
alphadweller is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 05:52 AM   #99
Dirt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Brisbane
Watch: DSSD
Posts: 7,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphadweller View Post
That's true, especially when it looks like it's not just a batch but affects older and more recent 3235s...

Many owners wear their watches on rotation and will probably never notice the problem if they don't pay attention, unless the watch starts losing minutes a day. I think this is the main reason why we are not seeing more owners coming forward. There's also fear that talking about it might cause value to fall in the preowned market.

I think we're only seeing the tip of the iceberg here. The question is how Rolex address the problem going forward, whether they carry on with their temporary and pointless fix or if they finally come up with a permanent solution. The 3255 has been in the market since 2015 with the 3235 being released shortly after, you'd think they've had time to take care of the teething issues .
Yes.
One big teething issue that goes on for years on end.
Perhaps into perpetuity.

It puts another perspective on Oyster Perpetual
Dirt is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 05:56 AM   #100
Annan
"TRF" Member
 
Annan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Real Name: Ron
Location: Arizona, USA
Watch: 116233
Posts: 3,175
Slightly off the basic subject of this thread but I will ask regardless.........My first DJ41, bought in 2016 quickly started slowing, ultimately reaching -9s/day. I found however, that if I wound the watch (at least 25 turns) every 3-4 days it ran fine, averaging around +1s/day. I checked the power reserve and it was fine at 70 hours. I was active and wore the watch at least 10 hours/day. It never stopped so I assume the auto winding mechanism was OK. Regardless of all this I was concerned that I had to wind the watch at all so I sent it off to RSC. It ran fine afterward. Any thoughts on what was going on?
__________________
so many Rolexes.....so little time
Annan is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 06:04 AM   #101
TheVTCGuy
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Paul
Location: San Diego
Watch: 126619LB
Posts: 21,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annan View Post
Slightly off the basic subject of this thread but I will ask regardless.........My first DJ41, bought in 2016 quickly started slowing, ultimately reaching -9s/day. I found however, that if I wound the watch (at least 25 turns) every 3-4 days it ran fine, averaging around +1s/day. I checked the power reserve and it was fine at 70 hours. I was active and wore the watch at least 10 hours/day. It never stopped so I assume the auto winding mechanism was OK. Regardless of all this I was concerned that I had to wind the watch at all so I sent it off to RSC. It ran fine afterward. Any thoughts on what was going on?
This is a question for Bas, (searchart), he is an expert. But IMHO, I wouldn’t accept a Rolex that had to be manually wound to keep accurate time.
TheVTCGuy is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 06:28 AM   #102
alpareflex
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Real Name: henri
Location: Bienne
Watch: omegaconstellation
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by illiguy View Post
One day I’ll inevitably own a 3235 as OP notes. That said, I’m thankful for the workhorse 3135 movement watch I do own.
Yes, 3135 is a workhouse, and I suspect the 3235 is more fragile. I read somewhere the barrel of the 3235 has thinner walls, making it impossible to replace the spring only. You have to throw away the barrel and replace it with a new one. Not ecological...
alpareflex is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 06:38 AM   #103
HiBoost
"TRF" Member
 
HiBoost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,493
There's the question of what a company admits, and the question of what it knows. It is highly unlikely that Rolex would publicly admit (even through non-public interactions such as an RSC servicing) a fundamental design flaw. A premium brand simply can not risk being thought of as anything less than "superlative". But unless we assume that Rolex have completely and utterly stopped being Rolex, there is zero chance that they do not know about a widespread issue. Any competent manufacturer is going to track service histories and look for ways to reduce warranty claims. The question here is, is this really a widespread issue?

Further, there is no such thing as a "perfect" mechanical product. JD Power said that last year for every 100 Lexus sold there were 159 problems. For every 100 Porsche sold there were 186 problems. In other words, on average every vehicle sold had more than one problem. So is it reasonable to expect all Rolexes coming off the line to be perfect? Of course not.

But, again, if this is a fundamental design flaw then the numbers would reflect that and it has to be on Rolex's radar. And if, after 5 years of a problem with no real solution they decided to still go ahead and power the new Submariner with this movement, then quite simply the Rolex was all love is dead. Again, if true, the Datejust name has already been trashed and now you're going to throw the Submariner overboard too? Even the most reckless of management wouldn't make such a move. And as we all know Rolex is nothing if not conservative. Therefore I must assume that this is more internet amplification than actual catastrophe, but nevertheless I follow the discussion with great interest.
HiBoost is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 06:56 AM   #104
DocOc
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: New York
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiBoost View Post
There's the question of what a company admits, and the question of what it knows. It is highly unlikely that Rolex would publicly admit (even through non-public interactions such as an RSC servicing) a fundamental design flaw. A premium brand simply can not risk being thought of as anything less than "superlative". But unless we assume that Rolex have completely and utterly stopped being Rolex, there is zero chance that they do not know about a widespread issue. Any competent manufacturer is going to track service histories and look for ways to reduce warranty claims. The question here is, is this really a widespread issue?

Further, there is no such thing as a "perfect" mechanical product. JD Power said that last year for every 100 Lexus sold there were 159 problems. For every 100 Porsche sold there were 186 problems. In other words, on average every vehicle sold had more than one problem. So is it reasonable to expect all Rolexes coming off the line to be perfect? Of course not.

But, again, if this is a fundamental design flaw then the numbers would reflect that and it has to be on Rolex's radar. And if, after 5 years of a problem with no real solution they decided to still go ahead and power the new Submariner with this movement, then quite simply the Rolex was all love is dead. Again, if true, the Datejust name has already been trashed and now you're going to throw the Submariner overboard too? Even the most reckless of management wouldn't make such a move. And as we all know Rolex is nothing if not conservative. Therefore I must assume that this is more internet amplification than actual catastrophe, but nevertheless I follow the discussion with great interest.
You said it yourself: Rolex cannot risk producing a product that is not designed properly. And let’s face it... they have a much easier job than a car manufacturer does. They design wristwatches, the biggest part of which is the movement (that will be used in most of their watches). If they can’t get that right, they’re screwed.
DocOc is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 07:08 AM   #105
saxo3
"TRF" Member
 
saxo3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: .
Posts: 2,658
The 3235 Movement and The Fix (2 years out)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiBoost View Post
Do we have agreed upon numbers for what constitutes "too low" of an amplitude? I have a 2 week old 2020 Sub (126613, bought from AD, taken from plastic "coffin" so never even touched or wound at the dealer before I got it) and I have worn it probably 5 or 6 times in that period. It has stopped a few times as I don't use a winder. Tonight, after wearing for several hours I wound it fully (75 winds) and put it on the timegrapher. After changing to each position I let it sit for 2 minutes, then monitored it for another minute keeping track of the ranges of both time error and amplitude. This is what I got:

DU: +2 to +3 s/d, 256-262 deg
CU: -3 to -6 s/d, 208-218 deg
DD: +2 to +4 s/d, 250-257 deg
CD: +0 to -2 s/d, 216-224 deg

Lift angle was set to 53 degrees as specified by SearChart in the other post.

I'll let it sit and check tomorrow night to see where things are at. But I've seen others posting that amplitudes around 215-220 are not good, but is that only for the dial up position? And even then, do we really know that to be true? Data from others seems to suggest that as amplitude drops over time so does accuracy. But if I'm still averaging +/- 2 s/d with a 210ish amplitude in certain positions, is that necessarily a cause for concern? And is there actually an appreciable break-in for these things? Is it possible amplitude could actually be higher in a month?

The only reason I care about these answers so much is that I'm on track to buy 3 3235 powered references this year. If this movement is really going to prove to be a maintenance headache I really don't think I want to head down that path, times 3... So I'm trying to get a feel for all this while I'm only on the hook for one of these things :)
Good that you use the correct 53 degrees lift angle and wait 2 min. after each position change.

A new watch with fully wound 32xx movement which only results in amplitudes of about 210 degrees has a problem! It will not become better in 1 month or later.

When my 126600 (with 3235) came back from Rolex repair (under warranty) it had 287/286 degrees for dial up/down; 246-253 degrees for all other positions.

Continue to measures how the amplitudes develop with time. It is very interesting to see correctly measured timegrapher data for new 2020 watches!
saxo3 is online now  
Old 19 January 2021, 07:24 AM   #106
Annan
"TRF" Member
 
Annan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Real Name: Ron
Location: Arizona, USA
Watch: 116233
Posts: 3,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
This is a question for Bas, (searchart), he is an expert. But IMHO, I wouldn’t accept a Rolex that had to be manually wound to keep accurate time.
I agree. It tests your faith that your $12K+ Rolex has to be manually wound. As I already said the watch ran fine after it came back from RSC but forgot to add that it lasted less than one year and then started losing time again.
__________________
so many Rolexes.....so little time
Annan is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 07:40 AM   #107
waterman1
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 779
I’m right in the middle of this issue now with RSC. Two watches. 126660 and 126600. Both sent in for this issue around 11/19 and fixed. Now sending 126660 back in for same issue again. RSC expressing that this is perplexing. Stating no issue with the movement. Saying they will get this right and sending message to me that this is a one off unique situation.
waterman1 is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 07:45 AM   #108
Alliy
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 141
Thank you for this information.
Alliy is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 08:36 AM   #109
HiBoost
"TRF" Member
 
HiBoost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxo3 View Post
A new watch with fully wound 32xx movement which only results in amplitudes of about 210 degrees has a problem! It will not become better in 1 month or later.
But how do you know this for sure? Several sources have indicated that these newer, longer power reserve movements are more efficient and thus have lower amplitude by design. How do we know that 210 is "too low" for a vertical position? If the timekeeping is completely accurate under these conditions, then how is that amplitude negatively impacting anything? Can anyone cite official Rolex service documents which define a minimum amplitude? In this thread a user named "watchmaker" indicates that 200 is the minimum permitted amplitude, but does not give a source for that information: https://www.rolexforums.com/showpost...73&postcount=7
HiBoost is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 08:56 AM   #110
MikeyV
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Real Name: Mike
Location: N. California
Watch: DateJust 41 TT
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterman1 View Post
I’m right in the middle of this issue now with RSC. Two watches. 126660 and 126600. Both sent in for this issue around 11/19 and fixed. Now sending 126660 back in for same issue again. RSC expressing that this is perplexing. Stating no issue with the movement. Saying they will get this right and sending message to me that this is a one off unique situation.
Bullshit.

My DJ41 from 2019 has been to RCS running -8 spd, came back fixed and went back to running -6 spd after a few months.

They REALLY need to get this sorted out.
MikeyV is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 09:05 AM   #111
waterman1
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 779
I am in watch chaos at the moment. Also have a Panerai in to their service center for unexplainable issue. Thinking about becoming a Seiko or Suunto guy:). No worries then.
waterman1 is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 09:13 AM   #112
C0d
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Kanata
Watch: Dog
Posts: 815
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterman1 View Post
I am in watch chaos at the moment. Also have a Panerai in to their service center for unexplainable issue. Thinking about becoming a Seiko or Suunto guy:). No worries then.
There are also plenty of MC Omegas with +1 a week
C0d is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 09:31 AM   #113
CedCraig
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterman1 View Post
I am in watch chaos at the moment. Also have a Panerai in to their service center for unexplainable issue. Thinking about becoming a Seiko or Suunto guy:). No worries then.
Or Grand Seiko 😏
CedCraig is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 10:14 AM   #114
alphadweller
"TRF" Member
 
alphadweller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Real Name: Vic
Location: Spain
Watch: SD43
Posts: 5,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterman1 View Post
I’m right in the middle of this issue now with RSC. Two watches. 126660 and 126600. Both sent in for this issue around 11/19 and fixed. Now sending 126660 back in for same issue again. RSC expressing that this is perplexing. Stating no issue with the movement. Saying they will get this right and sending message to me that this is a one off unique situation.
That sucks man. Thanks for coming forward about your issues with these models. Wow, it only took a bit more than a year for the problem to manifest itself again, on both watches at that. You're not the first to report that the problem comes back, but I didn't expect it to be so soon and on two pieces at the same time. How bad is it, what kind of time loss are we talking?
alphadweller is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 11:14 AM   #115
waterman1
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 779
Just to be clear the issue has only reappeared again on one of the watches - the DSSD. My sd43 remains at perfect accuracy since repaired in 2019.
waterman1 is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 11:15 AM   #116
waterman1
2024 Pledge Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 779
DSSD is slow by about one minute a day.
waterman1 is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 11:23 AM   #117
amanbra
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Real Name: Graham
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterman1 View Post
DSSD is slow by about one minute a day.
damn...................
amanbra is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 12:04 PM   #118
DocOc
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: New York
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterman1 View Post
DSSD is slow by about one minute a day.
At this point, they should just replace your watch. You’ve owned the thing for a few months and it has already been opened twice.
DocOc is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 01:32 PM   #119
JoseR
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Philly.
Watch: Air King, Omega AT
Posts: 2,143
My DJ41 even thou I don't wear it everyday and I usually wear it to go out but since Covid19 it usually rest in the box. I wear it in the house for about 8 to 10 days just to run the movement and it has been within specs. I got mine in 2019 with the crown at the six o'clock which I think was a later release than the first release of DJ41 without the crown at the six that were the first release. Maybe I'm just lucky or it's that I don't wear it long enough to notice any big variation of the -/+ seconds.
__________________
Air King 116900
Omega AT41 Gray Dial/Leather
Oris Pointer Date Roberto Clemente LE
JoseR is offline  
Old 19 January 2021, 02:00 PM   #120
DocOc
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: New York
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoseR View Post
My DJ41 even thou I don't wear it everyday and I usually wear it to go out but since Covid19 it usually rest in the box. I wear it in the house for about 8 to 10 days just to run the movement and it has been within specs. I got mine in 2019 with the crown at the six o'clock which I think was a later release than the first release of DJ41 without the crown at the six that were the first release. Maybe I'm just lucky or it's that I don't wear it long enough to notice any big variation of the -/+ seconds.
Or, maybe you’re not lucky at all, and instead, you simply have a watch that is working exactly as Rolex designed it to work and has verified that it works before selling it to you.

When I was in medical school, one of the faculty told something that has stuck with me to this day. He said, “You have to make a hundred patients happy before one of them mentions their positive experienc to other people. But make one patient unhappy, and they’ll readily tell a hundred people.”

I find this to be true in any setting, and not just in health care. The people who are unhappy are the ones who are the most motivated to make their thoughts known.

Now, I do believe that some of these people are having issues with their 3235-powered watches, and I totally understand their aggravation and ire over their situation. But their assertion that a company like Rolex has produced a movement based on a faulty design is simply ludicrous, for myriad reasons. They cannot simply accept the fact that they are merely victims of a manufacturing defect - something to which even Rolex is not immune.
DocOc is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.