The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18 July 2012, 02:06 AM   #61
AG1
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 104
Lug hole people: the last Comex Sea-Dwellers were F-serials with no lug holes. If they're good enough for Comex...

Ceramic people: ok, I know the ceramic inserts are more fragile and more expensive to replace but have there been lots of reports about broken inserts? How's that any different to a scratched/chipped sapphire crystal? Surely that would also mean that anything after plexi isn't a toolwatch?

Just some quick thoughts for the sake of discussion :)
AG1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 July 2012, 03:16 AM   #62
jhupp
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: NJ / PA / FL
Watch: Exp 1 and 2
Posts: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by snog View Post
So you work as a professional Diver?

Telling the time is an extra to the tool aspect, maybe the question should have been "when did Rolex stop only being good for telling the time".
Old post but, no. I don't own a sub either though.
jhupp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 November 2016, 11:11 PM   #63
raffi2222
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by AG1 View Post
Lug hole people: the last Comex Sea-Dwellers were F-serials with no lug holes. If they're good enough for Comex...

Ceramic people: ok, I know the ceramic inserts are more fragile and more expensive to replace but have there been lots of reports about broken inserts? How's that any different to a scratched/chipped sapphire crystal? Surely that would also mean that anything after plexi isn't a toolwatch?

Just some quick thoughts for the sake of discussion :)
Absolutely bang on observations! Rolex make watches for a multitude of wearers, the Sub is still a tool watch which has evolved and improved.

I don't dive so does that mean I can't wear a dive watch? No it doesn't.
I bought my steel non date sub for the realiability and bomb proof build quality having bought and sold a couple of watches that I couldn't have worn at work or when in the sea or pool on holiday or manual hobbies, as well as at night.
I do wear this watch all the time.

Having said that, I still won't wear it to my job as a firefighter, I wear another tool watch there, a non heat conducting g-shock. I wouldn't mind betting a lot of professional divers wear something similar to the g-shock. Perhaps even some hobby divers?🤐

As for price, it's all relative.
A sub was as expensive back in the day as it is now, relatively speaking.
raffi2222 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 November 2016, 11:14 PM   #64
Vincent65
"TRF" Member
 
Vincent65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,293
It was 17th March 1985
__________________
https://www.rolexforums.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=80782&dateline=139659  8629
Vincent65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 November 2016, 11:39 PM   #65
Fredrik
2024 Pledge Member
 
Fredrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden
Watch: 1680
Posts: 1,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by raffi2222 View Post
As for price, it's all relative.
A sub was as expensive back in the day as it is now, relatively speaking.
Actually, it is not! There was a recent article here http://www.ablogtowatch.com/rolex-pr...ling-analysis/ on the subject.

Depending on how you count, it is between 3 and 6 times as expensive today. The prices took of early to mid eighties. It is six times as expensive if you only look at inflation but three times as expensive if you compare it to the disposable income.
Fredrik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 November 2016, 11:48 PM   #66
HogwldFLTR
2024 Pledge Member
 
HogwldFLTR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Lee
Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48
Watch: What's on my wrist
Posts: 33,249
The death knell for the tool watch started tolling when the first transistor was made; the burial occurred when quartz watches could out perform their mechanical counterparts and made the cheaper much more appropriate for their required uses.

The advent of tool watches was because until that point watches weren't water proof or shock resistant. Rolex lead the charge into filling the void. It now is a luxury to own a mechanical watch that can perform as a tool watch.
__________________
Troglodyte in residence!

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=808599
HogwldFLTR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 November 2016, 11:50 PM   #67
locutus49
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2014
Real Name: John
Location: La Jolla, CA
Watch: Platona
Posts: 12,194
I think Rolex made a corporate decision at some point, maybe in the 70's or whenever the quartz crisis occurred, to transition to a luxury brand. This was a slow, methodical transition, which was accompanied by a change in advertising and corresponding price increases commensurate with luxury goods.

And this strategy succeeded as Rolex is now perceived primarily as a luxury brand even though their watches retain their tool DNA.
locutus49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 12:08 AM   #68
Rebel
"TRF" Member
 
Rebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Dr Mark R Nail
Location: New Albany
Watch: Tudor Sub 75090
Posts: 8,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Robert View Post
bah humbug....when they (Rolex) got rid of lug holes in their SS watches.
This.
__________________
-------------------------------
Member of the Nylon Nation
Rebel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 05:13 AM   #69
themaninblack
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,058
When professionals in their respective fields essentially stopped using them as such. Other equipment has largely taken their place.
themaninblack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 05:46 AM   #70
jban5
"TRF" Member
 
jban5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: USA
Watch: 5513~1675x2~1680~
Posts: 523
Isn't this a case of there isn't any "they" that covers all the bases?

If a modern day explorer (person) decides that having an Explorer for their exploration is in order, then they are getting a Rolex that is a work watch. If the guy down the counter is getting a GMT to go with the suit he is getting married in and that's as bad as it will ever get for that watch then it is a dress or fashion watch.

What is important in the discussion is whether the Rolex of 1970 was made tougher than the one of today. Would that Explorer stand up to the exact same stresses as the earlier one? Some would say moreso.

The one thing that I feel is less capable of surviving the same problems is the sapphire crystals. I've seen some really nasty impact scratches on plexi that I feel would put glass out of commission. You can see through scratches but shards of glass are another thing.
jban5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 05:54 AM   #71
dysondiver
"TRF" Member
 
dysondiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: tom
Location: northern ireland
Watch: my fins
Posts: 10,063
gecko ,,, wrote the sub off in a stroke ,,, end of.

[divers will know.]
dysondiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 07:22 AM   #72
JP Chestnut
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
I'd say sometime around when Seiko released their Tuna:
https://thespringbar.com/blogs/guide...llectors-guide
JP Chestnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 08:21 AM   #73
exador
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: NZ
Posts: 2,600
I think this graph sums it up. A tool watch to me means being affordable to the everyman, i.e. Casio G-Shock

exador is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 09:31 AM   #74
janice&fred
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: janice
Location: St.Petersburg Fl
Watch: all of them!
Posts: 673
i think rolex always tried right from the beginning to appeal to both the tool and fashion markets with their products. their vintage ads illustrate that especially with the subs being pictured worn with a tuxedo. their marketing strategy appealed to the guy who fancies himself as a "man of action" whether he was an accountant or commercial diver, etc.

reality is most "men of action" from long ago and in fact today are not much concerned what kind of watch they wore and it's mostly marketing hype. obviously it works as even people here in this forum claim to wear their rolexes "as they were intended" which is simply rolex TELLING you what to do with your watch. anyone willing to beat up a very expensive watch just to be consistent with a company's marketing hype is extremely gullible to say the least, and just like from the beginning...the RSC is more than willing to take your money when the thing comes in beat up. :)
janice&fred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 12:48 PM   #75
Paul_I
"TRF" Member
 
Paul_I's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,448
Very interesting thread! Quite entertaining.
__________________

Paul_I is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 03:00 PM   #76
htbilgic
"TRF" Member
 
htbilgic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Chicago
Watch: Doxa Pro 300 NoT
Posts: 535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Widows Son View Post
1. When people forgot what a dress watch was and thought it was OK to wear a Sub with a Tux.

2. When people started asking if it was OK to wear a Sub while in their neighborhood swimming pool.
So true!
htbilgic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 03:16 PM   #77
T. Ferguson
"TRF" Member
 
T. Ferguson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 7,025
They ceased being actual tools when either a better tool came along (like the dive computer) and/or they became too expensive to be purchased strictly as a tool (the GMT). While the GMT is still quite a useful tool let's be honest, very few people will spend close to $10K for no other reason than to track time zones when a free app will do.

The Rolex Professional line today is a luxury watch with a tool heritage. Not a thing wrong with that.
__________________
Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.
T. Ferguson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 05:25 PM   #78
capote
"TRF" Member
 
capote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Daniel
Location: Sweden
Watch: 16570
Posts: 7,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus49 View Post
I think Rolex made a corporate decision at some point, maybe in the 70's or whenever the quartz crisis occurred, to transition to a luxury brand. This was a slow, methodical transition, which was accompanied by a change in advertising and corresponding price increases commensurate with luxury goods.

And this strategy succeeded as Rolex is now perceived primarily as a luxury brand even though their watches retain their tool DNA.
I agree with this. If the transition hadn't occured the brand would be long gone.
capote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 10:14 PM   #79
Vincent65
"TRF" Member
 
Vincent65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by janice&fred View Post
i think rolex always tried right from the beginning to appeal to both the tool and fashion markets with their products. their vintage ads illustrate that especially with the subs being pictured worn with a tuxedo. their marketing strategy appealed to the guy who fancies himself as a "man of action" whether he was an accountant or commercial diver, etc.

reality is most "men of action" from long ago and in fact today are not much concerned what kind of watch they wore and it's mostly marketing hype. obviously it works as even people here in this forum claim to wear their rolexes "as they were intended" which is simply rolex TELLING you what to do with your watch. anyone willing to beat up a very expensive watch just to be consistent with a company's marketing hype is extremely gullible to say the least, and just like from the beginning...the RSC is more than willing to take your money when the thing comes in beat up. :)
There's nothing "extremely gullible to say the least" about just wearing a watch for every-day life, and not obsessing over it, and then getting it serviced when it needs one.
__________________
https://www.rolexforums.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=80782&dateline=139659  8629
Vincent65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 11:39 PM   #80
raffi2222
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2
You're right Vincent 65, or rather, I agree with you.
I love my watch as I have every watch I've owned but every watch could get damaged or need serviced.
I've sold all the other watches I owned, apart from a digital, and replaced them with an expensive tool watch which I'll wear most of the time and appreciate it.
Barring theft or unrepairable damage I'll probably never buy another watch, other than another g-shock, or similar, for my professional life. So in the long run I'll have saved myself a packet!
As a newbie to the brand I hope not to get as unaccepting to change as some seem to be.
Naturally I'm assuming we're all Rolex fans or owners on this forum of course.
Too expensive? Damn right! But it was my cash 😬
raffi2222 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 November 2016, 11:56 PM   #81
locutus49
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2014
Real Name: John
Location: La Jolla, CA
Watch: Platona
Posts: 12,194
I think that luxury goods in general are not only status markers - they are, because of exclusivity (high cost) - but they also are objects of desire due to high quality fit, finish and design.

And if you can appreciate the high quality of luxury items, they convey a sense of enjoyment to the owner.

If you are a man of discernment, there are few ways to enjoy the quality of luxury goods: watches, clothes, cars. And for we men who enjoy these luxury goods not only for status but also for the intrinsic quality of the objects, then enjoy. Life is short, give yourself pleasure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raffi2222 View Post
You're right Vincent 65, or rather, I agree with you.
I love my watch as I have every watch I've owned but every watch could get damaged or need serviced.
I've sold all the other watches I owned, apart from a digital, and replaced them with an expensive tool watch which I'll wear most of the time and appreciate it.
Barring theft or unrepairable damage I'll probably never buy another watch, other than another g-shock, or similar, for my professional life. So in the long run I'll have saved myself a packet!
As a newbie to the brand I hope not to get as unaccepting to change as some seem to be.
Naturally I'm assuming we're all Rolex fans or owners on this forum of course.
Too expensive? Damn right! But it was my cash 😬
locutus49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 03:06 AM   #82
Evad3
"TRF" Member
 
Evad3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Real Name: Dave
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Watch: 14060m/216570
Posts: 773
If you wear a SubC diving is it a tool watch?
If you wear a 14060 laying on the sofa is it a tool watch?
__________________
Current: NOS 14060m , 216570 Polar
Previous: 116710BLNR, 114060, 2x NOS 14060m
Evad3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 03:48 AM   #83
locutus49
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2014
Real Name: John
Location: La Jolla, CA
Watch: Platona
Posts: 12,194
Well, as I see it, a hammer is a tool whether you are hammering a nail or sitting on the couch with it. A tool is a tool whether you are using it or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evad3 View Post
If you wear a SubC diving is it a tool watch?
If you wear a 14060 laying on the sofa is it a tool watch?
locutus49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 03:52 AM   #84
HeartRolex
"TRF" Member
 
HeartRolex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Real Name: Butterfly
Location: USA
Watch: ROLEXROLEXROLEX
Posts: 635
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillycheez View Post
+10000000
Ditto!

The ever increasing cost of luxury goods seems intended to price out the mass majority, even as it relates to tool watches. These prices make all luxury items more exclusive for those who can purchase them and elusive for those who can't.
HeartRolex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 05:25 AM   #85
Hpozzuoli
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Real Name: Henry
Location: Rhode Island
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 990
When the tools started buying them...
Hpozzuoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 06:53 AM   #86
Evad3
"TRF" Member
 
Evad3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Real Name: Dave
Location: Portsmouth, UK
Watch: 14060m/216570
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus49 View Post
Well, as I see it, a hammer is a tool whether you are hammering a nail or sitting on the couch with it. A tool is a tool whether you are using it or not.
I agree

The SubC is a dive watch and is more than capable of diving

But definitely agree that price does factor in when it comes to how people treat their watch. 1680 sub is a tool watch but I certainly wouldn't wear that puppy in the water at any depths
__________________
Current: NOS 14060m , 216570 Polar
Previous: 116710BLNR, 114060, 2x NOS 14060m
Evad3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 09:39 AM   #87
rq3
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by themaninblack View Post
When professionals in their respective fields essentially stopped using them as such. Other equipment has largely taken their place.
I bought my 5512 in the early 70's when I was a commercial diver. I had owned Seikos and Bulovas. They all leaked. All I wanted and needed was a good, rugged watch that wouldn't fill with water. No bells, no whistles. I think I paid $275, maybe $375, for that 5512. It just got its first service last year, and it's on my wrist today. And yes, I still dive and shower with it. It's a damn diving watch.
rq3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 09:53 AM   #88
ABCWatchWerks
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by mldaytona View Post
The current sports models from Rolex (Sub C, Deepsea, Explorer I & II, GMT C) are no less tool watches than their older siblings from decades ago. What makes them appear fragile is that disease called OCD.
Agreed.
ABCWatchWerks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 10:11 AM   #89
ABCWatchWerks
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by mldaytona View Post
The current sports models from Rolex (Sub C, Deepsea, Explorer I & II, GMT C) are no less tool watches than their older siblings from decades ago. What makes them appear fragile is that disease called OCD.
Agreed.
ABCWatchWerks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 November 2016, 10:22 AM   #90
roadie1
2024 Pledge Member
 
roadie1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southeast
Watch: Divers, GMT
Posts: 2,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by rq3 View Post
I bought my 5512 in the early 70's when I was a commercial diver. I had owned Seikos and Bulovas. They all leaked. All I wanted and needed was a good, rugged watch that wouldn't fill with water. No bells, no whistles. I think I paid $275, maybe $375, for that 5512. It just got its first service last year, and it's on my wrist today. And yes, I still dive and shower with it. It's a damn diving watch.
Very cool! Post pics please!
roadie1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

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.