Falling out of love with Rolex….

[HogwldFLTR]

The 36mm watches certainly maintain the old lineage while taking advantage of many of the upgrades. The 40mm and above watches in general seem a bit bloated and ostentatious but I love my DJII with its fluted bezel exactly for that reason. I sold my SubC because it didn't feel good on my wrist and to fund my DJII which I like a lot more. In general I tend to like the five digits and the Tudors. I suspect there are still some choices for the OP in the Rolex line-up, if not then vote with the money; that's a good thing...

[droptopman]

I think the modern Rolexes are beautiful watches and have evolved as products should. Without innovation and product development companies die. That being said, I have tried to love the modern Rolex sport watch and while I think they look great, they just do not wear on me as well as the four and five digit models. This has nothing to do with external factors as some others have posted, they just do not sing to me on the wrist. This has less to do with they way they look and more to do with the way they wear. So much less to do with the ceramic insert but more to do with the "super cases". Honestly I wish they did as some of the new features are awesome. Especially around the bracelet and clasp improvements.
I have been collecting since the 80's and for whatever reason, as I mature so have my watches. I have gradually moved more and more to four digit references and I think that trend will continue. I guess I am just a vintage guy, but I still admire the modern references as well.

[Boothroyd]

I really like the new Rolex versions, but I trend towards the understated-looking models, like the Explorer and DJII smooth-bezel. I made that determination after having a version of every model on my wrist at one point or another while shopping at AD's.

I can see the OP's point, but Rolex should keep incrementally improving their line-up. I would expect nothing less from the brand. It is still possible to get a Rolex model that flies under the radar if that's an issue for you in making a selection.

[strafer_kid]

Originally Posted by droptopman

I think the modern Rolexes are beautiful watches and have evolved as products should. Without innovation and product development companies die. That being said, I have tried to love the modern Rolex sport watch and while I think they look great, they just do not wear on me as well as the four and five digit models. This has nothing to do with external factors as some others have posted, they just do not sing to me on the wrist. This has less to do with they way they look and more to do with the way they wear. So much less to do with the ceramic insert but more to do with the "super cases". Honestly I wish they did as some of the new features are awesome. Especially around the bracelet and clasp improvements.
I have been collecting since the 80's and for whatever reason, as I mature so have my watches. I have gradually moved more and more to four digit references and I think that trend will continue. I guess I am just a vintage guy, but I still admire the modern references as well.

Totally agree - its as much about how they wear as how they look! Much prefer the earlier smaller cases though no doubt the later designs are doing well for Rolex!

[WJGESQ]

Originally Posted by BawlaDK

Admitted, I am not a fan of the new generation ceramic Rolexes. For me they are all show and not much go to be honest. Far to flashy and “new money” ‘esque and they have actually kind of turned me off Rolex all together. I have several of the old pre-ceramic Rolexes and I Love them for what they are/were, but I find myself feeling more and more disconnected with Rolex because of the new gen. ceramic models. I don’t know what it is, but for some reason the new models and what they represent to me, deeply affects my feelings towards my older models and the brand all together. I don’t feel like selling my pieces, but then again I don’t really feel like wearing them either because of what they represent today in terms of the direction Rolex has taken. Additionally I really dislike the new designs, hence for me there are no new pieces that are really desirable other than maybe the new Cellini collection so its really difficult to maintain the same level of interest in the brand

These days I find myself looking more and more in the direction of smaller and relatively unknown brands, because I like the thought of wearing something that is not as flash as a Rolex.

Anyone else ever experience this, or am I just going slowly out of my mind?

I think the newer watches have greatly improved the line up. I know that I would not buy one of the older ones. The clasp is tinnie feeling and I was just never impressed. I know that I am in the minority on that----but the new bezels and newer bracelets were very much necessary to fend off Omega and a few of the other brands. And they sure have no problem in selling them. Maybe your having a bad day?

[Elusion]

I've owned my Rolex for three years, a 114060. It's my first but hopefully not my last. It took a lot to convince myself to buy it in the first place, it's a huge expense for me. I wear it everyday.
I work in an industrial setting with metal stairs, metal ladders, pipes, valves, machinery and metal walls. My desk is metal. There isn't a soft thing around. I've bumped it on all those things. No damage.
I've worn it at the beach, in a motorcycle accident (I was on the motorcycle), on a dirt bike trip in Baja, weddings, funerals. Everyday for everything. (I haven't worn my speedmaster in two years and I wear my G-Shock for the novelty of it which last about 20min)
My point is, this watch is everything I hoped it would be. A durable beautiful accurate Classic watch.
I think Rolex hit the bullseye.

[Fleetlord]

Originally Posted by BawlaDK

Admitted, I am not a fan of the new generation ceramic Rolexes. For me they are all show and not much go to be honest. Far to flashy and “new money” ‘esque and they have actually kind of turned me off Rolex all together. I have several of the old pre-ceramic Rolexes and I Love them for what they are/were, but I find myself feeling more and more disconnected with Rolex because of the new gen. ceramic models. I don’t know what it is, but for some reason the new models and what they represent to me, deeply affects my feelings towards my older models and the brand all together. I don’t feel like selling my pieces, but then again I don’t really feel like wearing them either because of what they represent today in terms of the direction Rolex has taken. Additionally I really dislike the new designs, hence for me there are no new pieces that are really desirable other than maybe the new Cellini collection so its really difficult to maintain the same level of interest in the brand

These days I find myself looking more and more in the direction of smaller and relatively unknown brands, because I like the thought of wearing something that is not as flash as a Rolex.

Anyone else ever experience this, or am I just going slowly out of my mind?

[sdelliott58]

I hear the same sentiments in the car community. I love my older 911 SC, but the reality is the newer ones are faster, safer and overall a better car. Some of the inherent manufacturing quirks that endear them (vintage - older) to our hearts, are also some of the things that technology, materials and associated manufacturing have removed, and in the process make a more "sound" product.

I think the same can be said for watches, and frankly there is ample room for newer pieces, as well as those that are a bit more vintage in nature..... at least in my safe. :)

[droptopman]

Originally Posted by sdelliott58

I hear the same sentiments in the car community. I love my older 911 SC, but the reality is the newer ones are faster, safer and overall a better car. Some of the inherent manufacturing quirks that endear them (vintage - older) to our hearts, are also some of the things that technology, materials and associated manufacturing have removed, and in the process make a more "sound" product.

I think the same can be said for watches, and frankly there is ample room for newer pieces, as well as those that are a bit more vintage in nature..... at least in my safe. :)

Excellent analogy.

[theflywrist]

I gradually steered away from modern and went more towards vintage.
Having said this I still own and enjoy very much my modern BLNR.
As others have posted above, it serves a good purpose having ceramic and sapphire as a tool watch as well.
Other than having it for that purpose, I appreciate vintage far more.

[Colin W]

Originally Posted by 1William

I can understand your viewpoint but do not agree. As time goes by companies attempt to improve the quality, design and function of products they produce. This is across the line in watches, cars , phones, computers, etc. Sometimes as consumers we prefer the design of earlier models. Not a problem, but the advancement of product development will continue even if some consumers don't like it. I have owned Rolex watches since the early 90's and I believe that the current generation is the best ever. I love the ceramic bezels and I believe the glidelock bracelet is the best. To each his own.

Totally agree - the new improvements are great. Ceramic Bez, bracelets, etc Really getting me back into Rolex in a big way 👍


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[J!m]

First off, I want to comment that This is a great discussion.

Secondly I somewhat agree with the OP in that in the begning, form followed function more. High done acrylic crystals looked crazy in the early days and were "necessary" for enduring the depths the watch was engineered for.

So fast forward to today. Many technical issues that arose in the evolution of the sub have come to a point of diminishing returns in my opinion. 904 steel? Ok. Crevice corrosion was a concern on the 316 watches when used in seawater.

Sapphire is great stuff too and can withstand great pressure because it is stiff and does not deform (much) under dive pressures, so easier to seal. A simple delrin ring does it. But, for a tool watch, I'd like to see a domed crystal to reduce the blinding effect caused by the mirror-flat surface in the sun. I think interior AR coating improves legibility. Exterior is great too but it is fragile.

The bezel being ceramic is great. But again, with a mirror polished surface, it can glare but a lot less than the crystal does. Make it matte finish since this is a tool watch.

The bracelet technology is good. But other than the "tinny" sound, there wasn't much wrong with the 93150. Good, strong and light. The earlier folded 9315 was a problem) Form followed function. The new bracelet balances well with the thick, oversize cases of the new models.

Look at it this way: if you were going into combat, you'd want a durable, (literally perhaps) bulletproof watch that just works no matter what happens. The new models can do that but there are too many shiny/sparkly surfaces to draw undue attention from an enemy. Fixed spring bars are not necessary to be mil spec. Not a horrible idea but lug holes allow very strong bars to be used. And there were plenty of old watches that literally went to the depths of hell and back to illustrate that.

In summary, the best modem Rolex to me is the 116600 seadweller. Reasonable case, all the high-tech of the other models, and ready to go. That said, I'd appreciate a high-dome crystal with internal AR, and a matte bezel insert with all tick marks the same length like an old 5517. Not for the nostalgia but rather for the function of it. And while we're at it, have all the bezel markings glow. (Put a dome crystal on the Pelagos and you get it!) can we have a 40mm Pelagos II with no He valve rated for "only" 1000m depth? I think that would be a huge success. Particularly if there was an orange dial version along with the black and blue... But nobody ever asks me.

Carry on!

[locutus49]

Welcome to La Jolla..

Originally Posted by sdelliott58

I hear the same sentiments in the car community. I love my older 911 SC, but the reality is the newer ones are faster, safer and overall a better car. Some of the inherent manufacturing quirks that endear them (vintage - older) to our hearts, are also some of the things that technology, materials and associated manufacturing have removed, and in the process make a more "sound" product.

I think the same can be said for watches, and frankly there is ample room for newer pieces, as well as those that are a bit more vintage in nature..... at least in my safe. :)

[DPE]

Any change takes time to understand and appreciate. Cars, motorbikes and watches all have a following. Most peolpe saying that the old model is best. All changes yet again when the New model later becomes the Old model. It is part of the time line.

[silverbullet818]

Watches are so small. Safes are so big.

There is a reason for this.

Keep collecting!

[Watch This]

Originally Posted by superdog

personally, I like them all.

however, I have never made a secret of the fact that I do not like what Rolex "represents".

while many on this site appreciate the history, build quality, aesthetics and more, there are many more on this site that buy the brand simply because they want a "rollie".

I like watches. I have always liked watches. And Rolex is the brand it is, because of the amazing watches they produce.

but sadly, in my view, to most, the watch itself is secondary to the fact that they are wearing the worlds most widely recognized luxury brand.

Excellent post.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by sdelliott58

I hear the same sentiments in the car community. I love my older 911 SC, but the reality is the newer ones are faster, safer and overall a better car. Some of the inherent manufacturing quirks that endear them (vintage - older) to our hearts, are also some of the things that technology, materials and associated manufacturing have removed, and in the process make a more "sound" product.

I think the same can be said for watches, and frankly there is ample room for newer pieces, as well as those that are a bit more vintage in nature..... at least in my safe. :)

I was going to say the same thing, and, if I didn't promise my wife a safer car for driving around with my 4 year old, I'd pick a vintage Porsche every time. Porsches went past the point of usable speed in public long ago, and, every year, better safety, performance and environmental impact comes at the detriment of feel and sound, particularly with the new all-turbo lineup.

Analog wrist watches are an anachronism that have held on, and I could care less if a new Rolex is more accurate, durable, adjustable, made out of unobtanium, etc. The 5-digit Rolex watches are the last of the "air-cooled Porsches", so to speak.

As William Gibson told WatchPaper recently: "With a very few exceptions, contemporary luxury Swiss doesn’t appeal to me. I feel those watches have become power-jewelry exclusively, a class of archaic luxury item. Your phone tells more accurate time. I respond most to watches from the century in which they were utterly necessary. "

http://www.watchpaper.com/2015/07/16...on-on-watches/

[watchwatcher]

OK...to each his own.

Good luck with your search for the watch you do love.

[mater]

Big and Shiny sells. Small and dull does not.

That being said, I appreciate both vintage and new models.

[Justinmg]

I agree with OP, not a fan of any of the new models. I've had a 114060 and a 214270 and I'd take there 5 digit counter part any day.

[DJTOSUB]

Originally Posted by BawlaDK

I don’t know what it is, but for some reason the new models and what they represent to me, deeply affects my feelings towards my older models and the brand all together. I don’t feel like selling my pieces, but then again I don’t really feel like wearing them either because of what they represent today in terms of the direction Rolex has taken.

Some of what you said is open for discussion but the above comment is just ridiculous. If you like your older models wear them and enjoy them.

Or are you the type of person who is always concerned about what others think?

[GradyPhilpott]

I'm glad I got into Rolex when I did. I have two old-school models and two new-school models and I like them all.

There are new model watches that I'm not interested in and I probably have all the Rolex watches I'll ever own.

I do have the Tudor North Flag, which I like a lot and I have plans to buy one of the Tudor chronographs this year.

I'm a big fan of Rolex and what they have stood for in the watch world, but I'm not necessarily on board with where they're going.

The one thing to remember is that the new DD40 might be the harbinger of a new direction for Rolex, so it might be wise to stay in touch, even if you are somewhat disaffected at the moment.

[AK1984]

I believe and encourage evolution and progress


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sickened1]

I started out with newer references (114060, Hulk, BLNR, etc) and now I'm looking into older, 5 digits references. When I finally have all the ones I want, I guess I'll start looking for a new hobby.

[pd999]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

The one thing to remember is that the new DD40 might be the harbinger of a new direction for Rolex, so it might be wise to stay in touch, even if you are somewhat disaffected at the moment.

Hope so

[Wcdhtwn]

Companies evolve their products. Doing so they realize that some of their customers will not evolve with them... It's a risk but they have to stay relevant in terms of technology and the competition. Evolving also attracts new customers and in Rolex's case it seems they attract more new than they lose in old. Me for example, in 1998 I decided to start collecting and chose an Omega Seamaster over a Sub because the sub felt cheap, especially the bracelet, compared to the Seamaster. However with today's ceramic and Supercase Rolex finally has the feel I'd expect from a $8000 watch and I'm a huge Rolex fan now. I have one and want to buy another, and another. Based on the comments I read in this forum it feels (this is an impression and not scientific) 90+% or more like the new models and the old, few have your perspective of disliking the new and thus abandoning the old. Not that it's wrong, but it seems to be the minority view.

[Daytona88]

love the newer 6 digit refs. The build quality seems so much more solid than older versions. I don't have a lot to compare but that is my thought.

[Copasetic]

Let's face it, Rolex is in business to sell watches. If they didn't make subtle changes and "improvements" we wouldn't keep buying. Case in point: The James Cameron DSSD. A simple dial color change and AD's can't initially keep the watch in stock.

[Mr. K]

Originally Posted by J!m

Look at it this way: if you were going into combat, you'd want a durable, (literally perhaps) bulletproof watch that just works no matter what happens. The new models can do that but there are too many shiny/sparkly surfaces to draw undue attention from an enemy.

Interesting, many watches never even see water let alone any combat.

As a tactical watch not sure I'd pick Rolex. Wonder how many soldiers wear Rolex in battle?

[J!m]

Originally Posted by Mr. K

Interesting, many watches never even see water let alone any combat.

As a tactical watch not sure I'd pick Rolex. Wonder how many soldiers wear Rolex in battle?

Well, that's kinda my point. The older "cheap" models were more suitable to combat AKA 'tool watch' use than the new models. MANY of the older Rolex (and Tudor) models were worn in combat. Some models even specifically issued by various governments for official military use. Those crazy engraved case backs drive the price through the roof now.

That is not to say that the new offerings are any less capable; the contrary is probably true. However, it seems apparent to me at least that there are many shiny, faceted and (admittedly) that deliberately flat top reflective crystal to enhance the "bling" which only serves the 'jewelry' aspect of the watch and moves further away from the 'tool'.

They still make and sell the Datejust and Day-Date (plus Cellini line) for the jewelry segment. Precious metals abound there too. I have no issue with jewelry watches looking like jewelry. I take issue with (what used to be) tool watches looking like jewelry.

My opinion is Rolex created a segment (the tool watch) and then slowly smothered it to death. That's probably a bit harsh but if you look at the historical "evolution" dispassionately, you understand my take on it. It evolved to the seadwellers and then they sort of got carried away.

I admit that I was excited to hear that the Sub was going to get a larger case. Once I saw it, with the larger lugs and the same size bracelet, the proportions were off and I really didn't like it. Rolex was out for me. I am a bit smitten with the 116600 as stated before, but if I'm honest with myself, the Pelagos is actually a better fit as a "tool watch" than even that 40mm Seadweller...