ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
29 January 2010, 07:52 AM | #121 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
It probably won't, and I hope not. I want my PO to last the rest of my life. But you took the discussion outside the parameters set forth earlier in the thread.
|
29 January 2010, 10:31 AM | #122 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Scotland
Watch: 14060m
Posts: 631
|
Quote:
Please see C.Davidsons post about PO issues. Im not an expert in movments and how they work but it sure seems to me like his has some issues! As for stating that the 3135 has design flaws, Have the issues that were brought up in that review ever materialised in real life?? Not that I have heard of or read on here. Again its all about personla choice, I love my Sub and the PO does nothing for me. But each to their own, as long as you are happy! Thats the main thing. Omega owners just love to try and bash Rolex. |
|
29 January 2010, 10:43 AM | #123 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: massachusetts
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 1,651
|
the po chrono is not the same as the PO. two different movements.
Quote:
|
|
29 January 2010, 10:47 AM | #124 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
The Omega in-house caliber 8500 is a totally from-ground-up design from Omega...it is built around the Coaxial escapement design (instead of the other way around). And the 8500 is a marvelous movement, IMHO. :) Note: my YM (bought new from AD) has not been an icon of durability...and it has one of the best (if not the best) Rolex movement...caliber 2235. As for the design flaws and reality, did you guys even READ the links posted?? See post #104. Oh no, those flaws do have REAL PRACTICAL implications! |
|
29 January 2010, 09:57 PM | #125 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Scotland
Watch: 14060m
Posts: 631
|
I Stand corrected regarding the PO chrono then. My mistake.
BUT "The early wear is the result of 7 years of use with no service. Unfortunately, many watch owners bypass the advice of the manufacturer to oil and clean the watch periodically. Mechanical watches should be cleaned and oiled every 2-3 years. You will rarely find a watch with no problem after even 5 years without servicing. " I would fully expect the movement to have issues if it went 7 years with no service. |
29 January 2010, 10:54 PM | #126 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
A few of you have selective reading!! Here is what i posted earlier:
Quote:
2. Seemingly, there is some cost cutting when Rolex went from 3035 to 3135, as noted by the 2nd weakness of the 3135. I am not saying that the Sub is a bad watch...and as stated before, i prefer it (or SD) over the PO because it is such an iconic watch. However, all of these blinded enthusiasms for the Rolex movement are not founded by facts nor by people who work on these Rolex movements. |
|
29 January 2010, 11:06 PM | #127 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,693
|
"However, all of these blinded enthusiasms for the Rolex movement are not founded by facts nor by people who work on these Rolex movements."
Very well said. There is also a under current of Rolex superiority and smugness present with the brand. I was guilty of this too when I first bought my Rolex but have matured in my watch collecting career. I now find that ignorant smugness disturbing. |
30 January 2010, 01:32 AM | #128 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Scotland
Watch: 14060m
Posts: 631
|
Who here is ignorantly smug?? Not me! I havent once said a bad thing about the PO (other than its not to my personal tastes) Im simply trying to put my point of view accross in defending a watch that I picked over any Omega.
I actually think its an inherant jealousy thing that (some)Omaga owners have, yes they own a good watch(no one has said otherwise) but they are constantly trying to one up Rolex mainly to make themselves feel better I reckon. |
30 January 2010, 01:37 AM | #129 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,693
|
No, I was never implying anyone here. I was more or less describing my various Rolex AD experiences.
Watchaholics know enough not to be smug. Quote:
|
|
30 January 2010, 01:49 AM | #130 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
|
|
30 January 2010, 01:53 AM | #131 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: massachusetts
Watch: Explorer
Posts: 1,651
|
I'm glad you said some Omega owners. Alot of the Omega owners here ( and those that prefer Omega in some instances) have Rolex watches. The jealousy theory doesn't quite wash for many enthusiasts on watch forums who have collected over a period of time. Even more so on broad based forums not primarily devoted to a particular watch brand.
Quote:
|
|
30 January 2010, 02:47 AM | #132 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Glendora
Posts: 215
|
Quote:
|
|
30 January 2010, 03:02 AM | #133 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Quote:
|
|
30 January 2010, 03:04 AM | #134 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
Post deleted.
|
30 January 2010, 04:17 AM | #135 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,036
|
It's amazing how some readers can find an article by a watchmaker (not a structural or design engineer), who claims some "technical fault", and run with it when the facts do not show the claims to be true..
The Rolex self wind mechanism is likely the most efficient on the market..even with the solid bushing axle (and because of it).. This makes the effieiency almost total, the rotor quiet, and repairs easy and inexpensive - and it's an expendible part (like gaskets) replaced on every service... The other "weakness" claim that the inner post can destruct easily when he is working on a 15 year old movement that is not showing any wear is just plain silly.. Practically every watchmaker and watch Engineer has nothing but praise for Rolex robust, accurate and well engineered movements.... As for Fan-boys of Omega's Co-Axial, the original 2500A practically self destructed within a couple of years...and had to be upgraded to the 2500 B, which too didn't last, and now it runs at a slower speed and with improvements the 2500C may make it to the downward projection of 8 years.... The 8500 is what Omega and Swatch is hanging their hat on... there has been zero in depth analyzing of this movement....everything about it is based on Omegas claims - and they may be true...but get a grip.. the Co-axial needs a freesprung balance to even work... Rolex has had this for years.. It's Omegas first time. The Co-axial needs to be slowed down to 25,200 for the escapement to survive.. and that is on the edge of it's performance as the original design engineering for the Co-axial escapement was based on 18,000 BPH Let's just stop trying to compare what Omega has just developed to try to get back in the game with what Rolex has had out for 20 years - It's apples and oranges.. People like one or the other and search out miniscule details to try and "prove" their point...but there is no proof... It's like Ford and Chevy...Like Mercedes and BMW... They're different....that's the whole idea behind the science of Horology, and the hobby of enthusiasts.......
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
30 January 2010, 05:30 AM | #136 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
Sometimes, being late to a party is a good thing.... |
|
30 January 2010, 05:40 AM | #137 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: The Mystro ;)
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 14,693
|
The only thing a thread like this is going to accomplish is pointing out the merits of each caliber. In the the end there is no loser here with either of these movements. I voted with my wallet....I own both so I guess that makes me doubly happy.
|
30 January 2010, 05:53 AM | #138 | |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,036
|
Quote:
and you can buy the same watchmaker journals and books and study up...
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
|
30 January 2010, 05:58 AM | #139 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
|
30 January 2010, 06:11 AM | #140 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: John
Location: Washington
Watch: 16710, 16610, DJ
Posts: 7,329
|
The PO is one handsome watch, no question. Very rugged looking.
|
30 January 2010, 06:55 AM | #141 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,036
|
It is a beauty.. I think their best looking watch since the discontinuation of the sword hand SMP..
And the 8500 is the first Omega movement to be produced at the old Omega plant since they closed the doors back in 1984, so it is becoming a great Omega Beacon.. It has a great future ahead of it..
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
30 January 2010, 07:01 AM | #142 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Glendora
Posts: 215
|
Yikes....... two thumbs way down now......
I think Tool should take his own advice in his sig. A mod should know better. |
30 January 2010, 07:07 AM | #143 | |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,036
|
Quote:
Biting into an obvious troll posting intended to bash one watch against another ??
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
|
30 January 2010, 07:10 AM | #144 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Glendora
Posts: 215
|
CHILL, it's just a watch forum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
30 January 2010, 07:16 AM | #145 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,036
|
True words...
But we do need to step in when members start to get too wound up with other members.... It seldom leads to a good ending.........
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
30 January 2010, 08:02 AM | #146 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Actually, i found the discussion to be lighthearted. Arguing peacefully is OK by me, esp. when i do back up what i write, instead of boasting wild claims with no actual proof. As a current Rolex owner myself, i don't mind a little back and forth. Should we all just group hug all the time and blindly proclaim that Rolex is perfect and can do no wrong? And isn't this the Omega subforum?
|
30 January 2010, 08:51 AM | #147 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,036
|
Tut, tut... You don't back up your claims.. You cite a single article of opinion as your basis for argument....
While I only research and collect Omega and Rolex... I don't pit one against the other.. I accept each for what it is. However...here are some experts words. With Rolex, it has it's attractors and detractors, but at the end of the day, there needs to be some consensus.... Watch Time Magazine is America's leading watch magazine and subjects watches to rigorous tests, scoring them on a scale up to 100 points. They are independent and have no manufacturers input to the tests... here is an excerpt of a summary of Watch Time Test Results as reported in the magazine. > As of the April2009 issue, Watch Time had tested a total of 173 watches, nine from Rolex and 164 from other brands. > On average, Rolex watches were rated 9.3 points higher than the average score of all other watches tested. The average score of all Rolex watches was 90.7 versus an average of 81.4 for all non-Rolex watches. > The highest score ever achieved in a Watch Time test is 95, issued to the Rolex Yacht-Master II in 2008 > Only 2 watches have earned a score of 94. One of them is the Rolex GMT Master II n 2006 > A Rolex also holds the third highest score: The Rolex Sea-Dweller Deepsea received a score of 93 in 2009. The test data make it clear that the top performer in Watch Time tests is Rolex..... I think that considering these watches all contain the flagship Rolex 3135 movement and the Rolex 3186 movement, as well as the latest YMII designs, it speaks volumes for the watch enthusiast when considering these watches and movements...
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
30 January 2010, 09:09 AM | #148 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: TX
Watch: Rolex Yacht-Master
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
BTW, i like WT. I check it out often at the bookstores. |
|
30 January 2010, 10:05 AM | #149 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Real Name: Paul
Location: Georgia
Watch: 16610LV
Posts: 172
|
Sub versus PO, PO versus Sub...blah, blah, blah. Is it an upgrade? A downgrade? Blah, blah,blah. I owned the PO and traded it to get the Sub LV. Now that is simply what I did because I, for many reasons, wanted to. I'm not sure what makes one an upgrade or a downgrade versus the other in either case, it is very personal. What nuances about the watch that makes me happy might not even be a consideration in your book and vice versa. They are both beautiful timepieces and represent just a couple of choices available. Great choices either way if and only if it makes you happy.
|
30 January 2010, 10:18 AM | #150 | |
TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,036
|
Quote:
You base your entire argument on two overhauls of old watches that show a worn axle rotor. Something that you might find in almost any Rolex (or any other watch) that has been in continuous use for 7 years on one and 15 years for the other... One asserts that it is a technical or engineering flaw... But, it is simply a worn rotor axle. No design flaw, no technical mistake.... a decision by Rolex Engineers to use a solid axle and bushing as a positive drive for the auto wind mechanism. This design is quiet, lacks the ball bearing wobble as found in the Valjoux 7750; is precise and easily replaced at a low cost.. Just like it is known that tires on a car will wear, so it is known that watch parts will wear. This is one of those parts and changed routinely at service time along with the Great wheel, pallet jewels and mainspring, etc..... You would have us believe that because these parts too wear, they are improperly engineered or "flawed" .
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.