ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

xelor777 · 16 January 2019, 06:17 PM

today I found the length of 114270's minute hand and hour hand is the same as 214270(WG 369)
it means they directly use 114270 old hands on new EX I model in 2010, although they improve that in 2016.(the price is also higher than 214270 WG)
does Rolex have the pressure of cost down? I don't believe.

JacksonStone · 16 January 2019, 06:27 PM

This was a question a lot of people had back when the 214270 debuted in 2010. The 2016 correction made it a moot point. The price did not go up with the 2016 model; it was the same price as the 2010 model at the time it was replaced.

watchwatcher · 17 January 2019, 12:53 AM

If you're building something and you have the parts laying around, doesn't it make sense to use them before you go out and buy something else?

jsausley · 17 January 2019, 01:15 AM

It's called running a business. Everyone reuses parts and 98.9% of people would never notice.

JacksonStone · 17 January 2019, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

If you're building something and you have the parts laying around, doesn't it make sense to use them before you go out and buy something else?

Not when you're Rolex and you're creating a new design. That's a lousy excuse for a design compromise. I'm just not sure why we're still talking about it nine years on, and three years past when they made it right.

JacksonStone · 17 January 2019, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsausley

It's called running a business. Everyone reuses parts and 98.9% of people would never notice.

A lot of people noticed, and Rolex corrected course in relatively short order (for them).

watchwatcher · 17 January 2019, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

Not when you're Rolex and you're creating a new design. That's a lousy excuse for a design compromise. I'm just not sure why we're still talking about it nine years on, and three years past when they made it right.

I wasn't validating Rolex's choice for using the parts. The OP asked a question, "why is Rolex so frugal?" and I gave him an answer. Which I'm pretty sure is correct.

Easy there...I didn't make the call to use the short hands.

JacksonStone · 17 January 2019, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

Easy there...I didn't make the call to use the short hands.

Yeah, I hear ya. I'm still annoyed by the Mk1, and that annoyance flares up when we talk about it. I hoped the 2016 correction would help me get over it, but some wounds are slow to heal.

Nikrnic · 17 January 2019, 09:43 AM

That always surprised me that they would let a bad design leave the factory as usually they're spot on. They must have been short handed.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Juan Luis · 17 January 2019, 09:59 AM

IIRC, Didn't Rolex do that with the transition of newer movements? Mixing it up until their inventory of the older movement was depleted.

JacksonStone · 17 January 2019, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juan Luis

IIRC, Didn't Rolex do that with the transition of newer movements? Mixing it up until their inventory of the older movement was depleted.

Examples?

Juan Luis · 17 January 2019, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

Examples?

Can't recall too well. But I know I read about and saw it on Youtube as well. Could be be the Explorer II from 3085 to 3086. Not sure though.

shaunylw · 17 January 2019, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

Yeah, I hear ya. I'm still annoyed by the Mk1, and that annoyance flares up when we talk about it. I hoped the 2016 correction would help me get over it, but some wounds are slow to heal.

It started to wear on me as well. That’s why i got rid of mine. It was annoying and difficult to read.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

xelor777 · 17 January 2019, 04:14 PM

I think Rolex could learn automotive industry, recall their 214270 mk1 to change longer min. hand for free. That's problem-solving.

Nairn1980 · 17 February 2019, 07:51 AM

I actually love my 2012 model with the white gold 369 and the shorter hands.
In fact I searched one to buy instead of the new model (prices weren’t far apart)

Just personal preference I suppose.

007_Omega · 17 February 2019, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xelor777

I think Rolex could learn automotive industry, recall their 214270 mk1 to change longer min. hand for free. That's problem-solving.

I think Rolex will change the hands for you if you request it on service but they take away the old hands. Not sure how much they charge, if anything above the service cost.

Yes, Rolex has a history of using parts off of other watches. The Air King is a Explorer and Milgauss frankenstein project.

Etschell · 17 February 2019, 08:06 AM

it's the Rolex way.

Paul_I · 17 February 2019, 08:09 AM

Thread seems a little late.

JacksonStone · 17 February 2019, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul_I

Thread seems a little late.

You think?

direwolf · 17 February 2019, 08:52 AM

I know some will disagree, but I think the SD43 needs to be brought into this conversation. I think the fact that Rolex used the bezel from the DSSD and the caseback from the SD4K really negatively impacts this model. The bezel is disproportionately large and the caseback is too small and protruding compared to the size of the case, which effects overall comfort. To me these two elements take away from what to me would have been my favorite Rolex in the whole lineup. Just my observations, but I am surprised others haven’t mentioned this much. I really hope Rolex eventually addresses these two issues.

Old Expat Beast · 17 February 2019, 08:58 AM

How about the new Air-King? Exp 369s, Milgauss case, hands from...?

CDNWatchNut · 17 February 2019, 09:15 AM

The Mk1 is sure a beautiful looking watch, in spite of the so called short hands...the WG 369 is just so much nicer than the lumed Mk2. Has anyone actually determined with certainty that the hands are identical to those in the 36mm 114270?

zengineer · 17 February 2019, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xelor777

today I found the length of 114270's minute hand and hour hand is the same as 214270(WG 369)
it means they directly use 114270 old hands on new EX I model in 2010, although they improve that in 2016.(the price is also higher than 214270 WG)
does Rolex have the pressure of cost down? I don't believe.

I think we discussed that 8 years ago and worked it all out here when they changed the hands around 4 years ago. You joined to bring up this?

Paul7 · 17 February 2019, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

If you're building something and you have the parts laying around, doesn't it make sense to use them before you go out and buy something else?

Not when they don't fit.

Easy E · 17 February 2019, 12:53 PM

It’s what happens when accountants get involved in design decisions.

16 January 2019, 06:17 PM	#1
xelor777 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: Taiwan Posts: 5	Why Rolex is so frugal on new model today I found the length of 114270's minute hand and hour hand is the same as 214270(WG 369) it means they directly use 114270 old hands on new EX I model in 2010, although they improve that in 2016.(the price is also higher than 214270 WG) does Rolex have the pressure of cost down? I don't believe.

17 January 2019, 01:15 AM	#4
jsausley "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2018 Location: North Carolina Watch: 214270/116710BLNR Posts: 813	It's called running a business. Everyone reuses parts and 98.9% of people would never notice. __________________ 214270 \| 116710BLNR

17 February 2019, 08:06 AM	#17
Etschell "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: FL Watch: platinum sub Posts: 15,884	it's the Rolex way. __________________ If you wind it, they will run. 25 or 6 to 4.

17 February 2019, 08:09 AM	#18
Paul_I "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2015 Location: USA Posts: 1,448	Thread seems a little late. __________________

17 February 2019, 08:58 AM	#21
Old Expat Beast TRF Moderator & 2024 DATE-JUST41 Patron Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Adam Location: Hong Kong Watch: SEIKO Posts: 28,356	How about the new Air-King? Exp 369s, Milgauss case, hands from...? __________________ _______________________

16 January 2019, 06:27 PM	#2
JacksonStone Banned Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Oregon Posts: 5,150	This was a question a lot of people had back when the 214270 debuted in 2010. The 2016 correction made it a moot point. The price did not go up with the 2016 model; it was the same price as the 2010 model at the time it was replaced.

17 January 2019, 12:53 AM	#3
watchwatcher "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Larry Location: Kentucky Watch: Yes Posts: 34,479	If you're building something and you have the parts laying around, doesn't it make sense to use them before you go out and buy something else?

17 January 2019, 09:43 AM	#9
Nikrnic "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2017 Real Name: Louis Nick Ric Location: Michigan, USA Watch: Blnr, Expll, Subs, Posts: 10,158	That always surprised me that they would let a bad design leave the factory as usually they're spot on. They must have been short handed. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

17 January 2019, 09:59 AM	#10
Juan Luis 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Real Name: Juan Luis Location: Dominican Rep. Watch: Undecided Posts: 1,325	IIRC, Didn't Rolex do that with the transition of newer movements? Mixing it up until their inventory of the older movement was depleted.

17 January 2019, 04:14 PM	#14
xelor777 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: Taiwan Posts: 5	I think Rolex could learn automotive industry, recall their 214270 mk1 to change longer min. hand for free. That's problem-solving.

17 February 2019, 07:51 AM	#15
Nairn1980 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: UK Watch: GMT Posts: 8,254	I actually love my 2012 model with the white gold 369 and the shorter hands. In fact I searched one to buy instead of the new model (prices weren’t far apart) Just personal preference I suppose.

17 February 2019, 08:52 AM	#20
direwolf "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2016 Location: USA Watch: 16610 Posts: 467	I know some will disagree, but I think the SD43 needs to be brought into this conversation. I think the fact that Rolex used the bezel from the DSSD and the caseback from the SD4K really negatively impacts this model. The bezel is disproportionately large and the caseback is too small and protruding compared to the size of the case, which effects overall comfort. To me these two elements take away from what to me would have been my favorite Rolex in the whole lineup. Just my observations, but I am surprised others haven’t mentioned this much. I really hope Rolex eventually addresses these two issues.

17 February 2019, 09:15 AM	#22
CDNWatchNut "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Real Name: Juan Location: Sherwood Park, Ab Watch: 114060 Posts: 1,509	The Mk1 is sure a beautiful looking watch, in spite of the so called short hands...the WG 369 is just so much nicer than the lumed Mk2. Has anyone actually determined with certainty that the hands are identical to those in the 36mm 114270?

17 February 2019, 12:53 PM	#25
Easy E 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: GA Posts: 4,280	It’s what happens when accountants get involved in design decisions.

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