New Style GMT Quality Issues

[mbrown55]

I have a new BLRO and under a loupe there is a defect in the paint on the GMT hand. Someone on a FB forum who has a BLNR noticed a similar defect in the GMT hand. Anyone else have anything similar to report on the painted GMT hands of the newer models? Its the only defect I've ever been able to detect on my Rolexes.

[123Blueface]

I have no idea and never will.
I guess ignorance is truly bliss.
I have never, ever considered taking a loupe and reviewing my watches.
God bless those that have the time and interest.

[Halothane]

I don't look at my watches under a loupe anymore and as a result I have much less anxiety.

[Fmnunes2803]

Never noticed anything on mine. If my naked eye can’t see it then it’s good enough for me.

[mbrown55]

I’m too much of a watch enthusiast to not closely examine every watch I come in contact with. To each his own i guess.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by mbrown55

I have a new BLRO and under a loupe there is a defect in the paint on the GMT hand. Someone on a FB forum who has a BLNR noticed a similar defect in the GMT hand. Anyone else have anything similar to report on the painted GMT hands of the newer models? Its the only defect I've ever been able to detect on my Rolexes.

A loupe in most all ways can and will be a new Rolex owners worst enemy.

[OpusXIII]

If you're a photographer, NEVER look at your lenses through a loupe! The sight will terrorize you. Loupe's for a Rolex? Not me. I'm good.

[VicLeChic]

The GMT 126710 is built on the cheap according to these guys (video from Nov 18).

https://youtu.be/SfLO1S7YfX0

You can see the sloppy paint job on the GMT hand at 2m23s.

[omx5o]

Just imagine what could be discovered under an electron microscope!

[Dr. Robert]

Ignorance is bliss

[mbrown55]

Thanks Victor, of all the replies yours was the only one in topic. Most days these forums are full of jerks, thanks for the info I will check it out.

[101031-28]

I hear you, OP your concern is a very valid one. That being said, I realized a while back that looking at my watch through a loupe was causing me unnecessary stress and angst, so it's something I do not do anymore. If my naked eye cannot see it, it's not there

[BobDyl]

Originally Posted by padi56

A loupe in most all ways can and will be a new Rolex owners worst enemy.

Peter is exactly right. Unwise to loupe a Rolex (but if you do, limit to 5X maximum. At 10X you'll lose your mind). I will say, however, that poor finishing on the GMT hand can be seen on occasion with the naked eye, because it transitions into the highly polished gold end, and I do think Rolex should address this.

[VicLeChic]

Originally Posted by mbrown55

Thanks Victor, of all the replies yours was the only one in topic. Most days these forums are full of jerks, thanks for the info I will check it out.

[Muxi]

I’m pretty sure both of my 116500 seconds hand are not perfectly centered at 12 o’clock. It look centered without a loupe though so I let it go.

Cheers!

[ras47]

If you want those truly hand-crafted details you have to pay Patek prices. Rolex parts are mass produced and there are bound to be minor flaws. That's the difference between a $12,000 watch and a $25,000+ watch. But to my eye, without a loupe, Rolex quality is very good. Not perfect, but good. Good enough, and the difference in quality between Rolex and Patek (insert any super premium brand) is not worth the price difference. I'm a tool watch kind of guy so I'm not looking for perfection.

[123Blueface]

Originally Posted by mbrown55

Thanks Victor, of all the replies yours was the only one in topic. Most days these forums are full of jerks, thanks for the info I will check it out.

So none of the other responses are on point or just don’t support the loupe?
Also, since none of those others are on point, are they all responses by jerks?

[Seafox0814]

I think the hands are actually one of the only items Rolex outsources, so whomever is making them has a paint accuracy issue.

It only seems to matter on GMT 24-hour hands with painted shafts, as the all gold 24-hour hands on the CHNR don't have any issues.

[Syed117]

Doesn't seem that uncommon.

Picture from a recent watchfinder video of the new meteorite dial blro.



As others have said, a Rolex is not meant to be examined under a loupe.

[T.Mas]

Most watch manufacturers test the watch with the naked eye at 30cm. Loupes are a bad idea for consumers, unless you want to enjoy your watch imperfections and all..

[Bob the brush]

I very recently took my GMT for service at RSC St James London, who quoted me for a new set of hands as one was marked slightly. I had not nlticed this blemish, and the technician explained it was visible under magnification. As I have never noticed it, and I don't own a loupe, I declined their kind offer. Ignorance is bliss!

[AJMarcus]

It can be quite stressful living ones life under a loupe

[ajw45]

Attached some macro crops of partially painted hands from a Batman, Sinn, Blancpain, and JLC. The Rolex is not very good but also less expensive than the BP or JLC so I dunno, you get what you pay for? The Sinn looks real good for under $5k.

Agree with others though, wish I had never looked at the GMT under the macro lens. I never noticed the uneven transition of the GMT hand from paint to polished gold with the naked eye but now I can't unsee it. GMT is still a quality watch though and (at MSRP) I think it's a great value.

[FloridaSam]

I welcome the coming macular degeneration I will most certainly get with old age. I can barely see the date, with a cyclops, anymore. All my watches are back to being in near mint condition!

[42itus]

I'm going to pop open a cold one and bust out my loupe tonight for gits and shiggles.

[Halothane]

Originally Posted by mbrown55

I’m too much of a watch enthusiast to not closely examine every watch I come in contact with. To each his own i guess.

Originally Posted by mbrown55

Thanks Victor, of all the replies yours was the only one in topic. Most days these forums are full of jerks, thanks for the info I will check it out.

I think our answers were actually "in topic". To be more transparent, we don't look at a Rolex under a loupe because it is an imperfect, high volume production watch and not what most would consider Haute Horology. You wanted examples I guess, so here are a few -

1)Yes, the paint on the GMT is often sloppy and not perfectly finished prior to the triangular point.

2) The 12 and 24 do not always line up perfectly on the model 16570 explorer.

3) My first Rolex Datejust (1987) had the Rolex Crown come unseated from the dial after 1 week of ownership (back then it was an actual separate crown held on the dial by 2 points).

I also think one can be a watch enthusiast whether they use a loupe or not. And finally, someone who has been a member for 6 months stating "Most days these forums are full of jerks" is very apropos.

[sillo]

Originally Posted by Syed117

Doesn't seem that uncommon.



Picture from a recent watchfinder video of the new meteorite dial blro.



As others have said, a Rolex is not meant to be examined under a loupe.

I don't think it's that big of a deal, but a $35,000 shouldn't have paint splatter on the hand like that. My 16570s 24 hour hand is perfect and the watch was a fraction when it was selling at retail.

And here’s a shot a family members 116710. That’s what the paint on the hand should look like.

[pepsiretail]

A loupe is generally considered as an aid for the appreciation of a hand finished movement.

Since this hand issue has been raised a few times recently I am going to check my Pepsi and BLNR next week.

You have peeked my curiosity OP but I have been into watches for some years and have never felt the need to examine my dials with a loupe.

[jonnyz1245]

Originally Posted by tomalf123

I think our answers were actually "in topic". To be more transparent, we don't look at a Rolex under a loupe because it is an imperfect, high volume production watch and not what most would consider Haute Horology. You wanted examples I guess, so here are a few -

1)Yes, the paint on the GMT is often sloppy and not perfectly finished prior to the triangular point.

2) The 12 and 24 do not always line up perfectly on the model 16570 explorer.

3) My first Rolex Datejust (1987) had the Rolex Crown come unseated from the dial after 1 week of ownership (back then it was an actual separate crown held on the dial by 2 points).

I also think one can be a watch enthusiast whether they use a loupe or not. And finally, someone who has been a member for 6 months stating "Most days these forums are full of jerks" is very apropos.

Very well said Tom and I agree 100%

[dba]

Originally Posted by mbrown55

I have a new BLRO and under a loupe there is a defect in the paint on the GMT hand.

Put the loupe away, put the watch on your wrist and forget what you saw.