Cyclops or no cyclops? Alternately, date or no date?

[Meridianum]

Do you prefer your Rolex references to be with or without the cyclops/date? I've had my 114060 for a week, and I hate to say it, but I keep checking my wrist for the date. It's not even that I forget the date. There's something about seeing the number change every day that I miss from previous watches. (I'm not interested in the SD at the moment, as a no cyclops date alternative). That being said, I do love the aesthetically pleasing symmetrical appearance of the dial sans-cyclops. I'm hoping I'll get used to it.

There are certain pictures in which the cyclops is very alluring to me, sitting atop the crystal like a gleaming jewel. In other photos it looks like a tumor. The cyclops itself seems to obscure the date when viewed from certain angles as well. Sometimes I feel like I want the additional complication to busy up the dial a bit, and that if you're going to be rocking one reference for a while, it should have date for versatility. Really not sure how to feel about it. I'm beginning to think I should have toyed with some cyclops-bearing references before I made my final decision.

I know this post is more about the date than cyclops, but there is no cyclops without a date. I realize no one can make up your mind for you, just looking for some outside viewpoints on the topic.

[kauffee]

I’m gonna blow your mind here. Some people like the date and cyclops on Rolex watches, whereas other people do not like the date and cyclops on Rolex watches. The no date has a symmetric dial, which many people like. However, it lacks a date complication which many people find useful. Some people even like the look of the cyclops.

[Meridianum]

I appreciate that this is well-tread territory. Just hoping I can resolve my own doubts by reading the stories of others.

[blowfish89]

I need the date but no cyclops :-)

[oroloi]

Remember we can also do without a watch as the time is displayed just about everywhere these days. We can also do with and without a date display

I prefer to have the date display and I also like the cyclops. I also like the no-date watches for the clean symmetrical dial. In saying this I'm totally confused as to what I want / need. In the next few years I want to buy the DD 40 and I'm sure I will still like watches with no Date or cyclops :)

I have no idea what I like I just like watches

[solesman]

I had the 114060 no date and that was my preference due to:

1. I don't need the date complication.
2. I like a clean dial.
3. I dislike the cyclops on the Submariner. I do like it on the GMT and Day Date though.

Many will answer the opposite. What matters is what YOU like.There is no right or wrong answer.

[Rashid.bk]

I don't like either/or as a specific preference. In a perfect Ken world I'd just own them all.
So as it stands, I love Rolex watches and each offers something very beautiful or unique to admire.
Some have stunning dials, others proportions, jewels, and then it could just be the smallest detail that one likes. A simple Oyster Perpetual might hit the right spot.

I have a D-Blue and will add a Sub no date just because it will be a change and offer something completely opposite from the Deepsea. Smaller, all classic black dial and iconic symmetrical Rolex Submariner dial. Neither will have a cyclops but that is coincidental. If I decide to add another it will surely be a BLNR and look forward to the date magnification to help my aging eyes.

Variety is the spice of life. If you are only able to own one watch for example, the solution is very simple, buy the one you love and need an not the one every likes on the forums. I don't need a Deepsea, but I love the wrist presence and gradient dial and domed bezel. Once or twice a week I may casually look at the date. I bought the watch I love in this case, and the same will be for the 114060...I make my purchase decision on aesthetic merit first because I don't need crazy waterproofing levels or split time chronographs, yacht timers, or day of the week....
What I really really need is the time at a glance, and when I happen to look down I love to be amused by whatever aesthetic beauty my wallet was able to afford.
How I would love to look down and see a Rainbow Daytona and the beautiful jewels glisten in the light....that would be like admiring art all day on my wrist.

[peterpl]

Yep - your exactly like me. Hence the main reason why I dont own a single no date watch. ALL my watches have to have a minimum of date complication.

Its actually a very useful complication I use daily.

I dont mind the cyclops though. Whether it has one or not doesnt bother me at all.

[Mephist]

I prefer a clean dial with no complications, just time. However I am like you OP and cannot have a watch without a date. I have tried it several times and just like you I find myself checking my wrist for the date all the time. Also if I am awake at 12:00, I enjoy hearing the click from the date changing, knowing the clock is now 12:00.

I also prefer the cyclops date over none cyclops date. For a short period about 8-10 years ago I remember I wanted all Rolex's to come with none cyclops date. Now I just think it looks weird and out of place without the cyclops and very much appreciate and enjoy how the cyclops compliments and makes the watch.




Photos borrowed from the internet.

[Dsmith1974]

I like to see the date on the watch even though I may know it already. I prefer the Cyclops to be on a Rolex than not. Yes you have to look at it square on but the 2.5x magnification filling the window looks great.

That said, it’s also good to pick up a watch without a date now and then and quickly set it without worrying about am/pm/day of month.

A date would ruin some watches (Millgauss, Speedmaster Pro, ...)

Would like an old no date sub one day too.

[JRT]

The watch with no date is a deal breaker for me now, and the Cyclops is nice to have because of my aging eyes.

[Sweetswisssteel]

A Rolex without a Cyclops is like a sandwich without bread

Sent from my HTC 2PXH3 using Tapatalk

[accountank2000]

Originally Posted by JRT

The watch with no date is a deal breaker for me now, and the Cyclops is nice to have because of my aging eyes.

I prefer to have the date though I have a few without it. It's more useful when at work than when I'm not.

I'm the other way around from you in that my eyes aren't ageing yet, so don't really need the magnification. And if I did want the date to be twice as big to read it, I'm not disabled so can easily move my hand towards my eye for a second...

To me, the Cyclops is something to find on a watch that I could see my retired father wearing, like a DJ or DD. When you get later in life and the support for your eyesight is useful and you don't mind spoiling the clean lines of your watch by sticking a magnifying blob over one side of it. Not that the DD or DJ are ugly watches - they're iconic classics - but probably something I'd only look for in the later half of my life.

The 'I can always move my wrist nearer to my face' as a reason to prefer no magnification probably sounds a bit flippant. But in the real world from most angles the cyclops literally obscures the date, either partially or fully, so you have to move your wrist anyway to see it straight on (c.f. the huge numbers of photos on the forum where you see the cyclops masking part of the date).

So, I'm a date fan, but not a cyclops fan, which is why I have a previous-gen seadweller rather than a sub date or sub no date.

And because all rules have exceptions, I very much like the Daytona - which doesn't have or need a date, no space on the dial for one anyway - and I could see myself wearing a cyclops on the DJ or DD, but only when I'm maybe 55-60+.

[Harry-57]

I have Roles watches with and without the date. Those with a date have the cyclops. It's a very useful feature for me. I like it. I have a Tag with a cyclops and it's rubbish. At least when Rolex do something, they do it properly. If you don't like it, don't have it. If it has to be a Rolex with a date but no cyclops, you have one clear new option and two used.

[The Libertine]

Personally, I think the date/cyclops looks better on certain Rolex models than others. That said, I think any Rolex collection should have at least one model with the cyclops.

[zengineer]

I went decades without wearing a watch at all in my 20's and 30's and never became dependant on a date function. Those times were also mostly before mobile phones....certainly before smartphones. Somehow, I was able to pretty much know what day it was and while it sometimes took a few seconds of head scratching, I could nail down the date.

I now wear a watch daily but rotate 3-5 different ones. The collection changes but half usually are without date. If it didn't limit my choices so extremely, I'd be 100% no date. I just prefer the cleaner look.

Even when wearing a watch with a date function, I really don't use it. I keep most watches on a winder but it's still unlikely they'll all be right early March or any other month following a short month. Yet miraculously, maybe due to the decades without a watch, I pretty much know the date all day every day. I create a lot of documents that focus on the upcoming Monday so I think that helps drill the date into my brain.

I realize the cyclops has become a Rolex "styling cue" in many ways but I find it archaic, unsightly and one of the least elegant solutions to a problem ever put into production.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[abozz]

Rolex invented the first wristwatch with date window and cyclops, and I love both features. Rolex=Cyclops!

[Art 1]

I like without.

[Bearwithme]

Personally prefer with cyclops but can understand people saying they like the symmetry without. Nothing to do with the magnification for me though, I just prefer the asymmetry - that and it’s what I think a Rolex with a date (opinion) “should” look like - basically what I’ve grown up seeing in the main and therefore how I feel it’s meant to be.

Date window without cyclops seems wrong to me - almost Fugazi - have to remind myself that these models are legit and not modified - even knowing it’s intentional and original I find it looks wrong , odd how one can have such strong preferences over something so small

All this relates specifically to Rolex and sports/ professional models only though - if I had a true dress watch (say a Lange) then I’d be saying a cyclops on the date window is sacrilege

[1William]

The date on a watch does not matter to me one way or another. If the watch design incorporates a date, I am good with it. If it does not have a date, I can appreciate that also. I like the Submariner lineup and have owned them all but the ND is great because of the balance with the dial. I do not need a date, as I knew the date yesterday which means I know the date today. I know which month has how many days and I even know the leap year by memory. I just think it is a matter of personal preference not necessity.

[AEC]

Originally Posted by The Libertine

Personally, I think the date/cyclops looks better on certain Rolex models than others. That said, I think any Rolex collection should have at least one model with the cyclops.

Agreed. Gimme a DJ or DD for when I want my watch to track the date for me, and gimme a Submariner for when I want casual, sporty elegance

[lenfried29]

If you like date and no cyclop buy sd43 without cyclop. If you like date and cyclope buy sd43 with cyclop or Sub date. If you don't like cyclop and date just buy Sub ND. I prefer sd43 without cyclop.

[77T]

On Date - No Date
IMHO it depends on what you do - and how you communicate. If knowing the time for general purposes and casual use if your prime objective then the date is superfluous. But if you are often operating without a mobile device and writing a lot of paperwork where the date & time is key, then I get it.

As for cyclops...the side-by-side Explorer II Polar shows how weak the date window appears when the cyclops has been removed. If Rolex was planning to eliminate the cyclops, and update models - then it would look better if they enlarged the date wheel to give legible numerals.

I quickly edited the photo used earlier to illustrate:




I know the current internal movement real estate doesn’t afford an easy update. But others have accomplished this with dual date wheels (one with a blank thru 3, the other with 0-9).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[brandrea]

Luckily you can have the best of all three worlds:

No date
Date
Date with cyclops

[Lou wants a Rolex]

When I was looking for watches I tried On date and no date. I am not a sports watch guy but I do like the polar explorer 2. I was trying to decide between the oyster perpetual and date just. When I first saw the date just I was not into the date. Many trips to the AD trying on watches and taking pics. The cyclops date really grew on me. I bought the date just 116200 in black. I really love it and find the cyclops to be a Rolex symbol. It’s useful and every other day is black or red. If I get another Rolex in the future I would consider the explore 2 polar or a oyster perpetual.

It is very hard to improve on a 116200 for an everyday watch.

[Mystro]

Cyclops fan for me. It’s a iconic Rolex design but I also need it the older I get. My Panerai did a nice variation of it by inverting it under the crystal.

[AndrewMayhem]

As much as I love a clean, symmetric dial - I find the date incredibly useful. When I wear my oyster perpetual I find myself looking down for it. Also, if I have a watch with a date, such as my GMT, I want the cyclops. I used to have a Tudor sub 79090 with a tropic crystal and it just seemed off to me. But when I wear a datejust or the GMT with the cyclops, it works as a cohesive design element.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mephist]

Originally Posted by Lou wants a Rolex

When I was looking for watches I tried On date and no date. I am not a sports watch guy but I do like the polar explorer 2. I was trying to decide between the oyster perpetual and date just. When I first saw the date just I was not into the date. Many trips to the AD trying on watches and taking pics. The cyclops date really grew on me. I bought the date just 116200 in black. I really love it and find the cyclops to be a Rolex symbol. It’s useful and every other day is black or red. If I get another Rolex in the future I would consider the explore 2 polar or a oyster perpetual.

It is very hard to improve on a 116200 for an everyday watch.

I completely agree with you.

[zengineer]

I'll be buying a new 41mm Datejust in as soon as they release a no date version...Basel 2019 maybe?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Mephist]

Originally Posted by zengineer

I'll be buying a new 41mm Datejust in as soon as they release a no date version...Basel 2019 maybe?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

there will never be a Datejust with no date. A Datejust with no date is called Oyster Perpetual