ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

frank bullit · 23 September 2006, 07:32 AM

Hi, I saw someone say that cyclops can be removed by someone who knows what they're doing as it's only glued on. Does this mean a lens could be stuck onto a(n) SD?

FB.

Launch Mini · 23 September 2006, 07:38 AM

In theory, yes.
But I would guess that the re-gluing would be tricky. Getting the glue perfect so as not to have any blemishes between the two surfaces.
Plus getting it on straight.
BUT WHY?
Once you take your SD down to those depths, the cyclops would fall right off.

Launch Mini · 23 September 2006, 07:40 AM

In theory, yes.
But I would guess that the re-gluing would be tricky. Getting the glue perfect so as not to have any blemishes between the two surfaces.
Plus getting it on straight.
BUT WHY?
Once you take your SD down to those depths, the cyclops would fall right off.

viper · 23 September 2006, 07:43 AM

just sell it & buy a sub then. unless you're a diver & the difference in water depth matters.

btw, is is true that the SD a depth rating higher than even a diver can withstand?

Launch Mini · 23 September 2006, 07:49 AM

My swatch with 30 feet rating is more than I would ever go

I think I have taken my Sub to about 7 feet down

robertd · 23 September 2006, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by viper

btw, is is true that the SD a depth rating higher than even a diver can withstand?

Yes, the limit for most recreational divers is around 100 to 150 feet, anything below that would be pretty dangerous.

Only military and research divers wearing special suits and using very specialized equipment could go as deep as even the rating on a Sub, much less the SD.

Regards, Robert

mike · 23 September 2006, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank bullit

Hi, I saw someone say that cyclops can be removed by someone who knows what they're doing as it's only glued on. Does this mean a lens could be stuck onto a(n) SD?

FB.

Hi Frank,
That was me.Indeed the cyclops can be removed. I have seen several examples of GMTs and Subs with the cyclops removed. Depends on if you like the look. Personally I think it looks pretty good on a matt dial sans WG surrounds, but that's just personal preference.
Interestingly there was a time when the GMT was offered without a cyclops.

Now as to the SD, I thought I read somewhere that due to a difference in the crystal adding a cyclops was not viable.

JJ Irani · 23 September 2006, 02:28 PM

Show me an SD with a cyclops and for the very first time in my entire life you'll hear these words: I HATE ROLEX!!

teton · 23 September 2006, 04:02 PM

For the record I love the cyclop on my Datejust. I just love looking at it. It's very unique and most watches these days no longer have this unique feature.

-Teton

frank bullit · 23 September 2006, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Show me an SD with a cyclops and for the very first time in my entire life you'll hear these words: I HATE ROLEX!!

Why?
The cyclops, was presumably added so that the small date window could be read more easily. Why wouldn't buyers of the SD want this option.
Personally fancy a Seadweller, but I also want the cyclops on my Rolex. I have no intention of taking it to more than snorkalling depths.
A poseur? Probably, how many 'flying jackets' get used for that purpose, how many speedo's get taken to 200mph, how many GMT's 24hr hand gets used
regularly, very few in all those cases I suspect.
But, Hey! It's good to have the choice, and if my cyclops does fall off at
4000 ft JUST when I wanted to know what the date was......

In the DEEP nobody can hear you screaming!

Regards, FB.

Gedanken · 23 September 2006, 04:23 PM

Yes, the Cyclops can be glued on. I'll leave the aesthetic side of the matter alone.

I believe Comex's record dive depth was 503 metres, which is less than half of what the SD's capable of taking but more than the Sub's rating.

padi56 · 23 September 2006, 06:34 PM

Yes agree with James but its got to be done correctly,and by someone who knows what they are doing.Its not a case of just dabbing a bit of glue then sticking it on.

miner · 24 September 2006, 12:48 AM

This is from John Holbrook's sd review on his Rolex Reference Page (http://www.rolexreferencepage.com/)..

"To accomplish this feat, Rolex employs a thicker sapphire crystal than is used in their other sport watches. Because of the added crystal thickness, their standard magnification cyclops used over the date window is rendered useless. It is for this reason that the Sea-Dweller does not have a date magnifier, and many prefer the cleaner look this brings to the Sea-Dweller dial"

frank bullit · 24 September 2006, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miner

This is from John Holbrook's sd review on his Rolex Reference Page (http://www.rolexreferencepage.com/)..

"To accomplish this feat, Rolex employs a thicker sapphire crystal than is used in their other sport watches. Because of the added crystal thickness, their standard magnification cyclops used over the date window is rendered useless. It is for this reason that the Sea-Dweller does not have a date magnifier, and many prefer the cleaner look this brings to the Sea-Dweller dial"

Well done Miner, that's the info' I was lookin' fer.
So! My dreams of a Seadweller complete with ol' Mr Cyclops are dashed!

....Or are they?

Thanks boys, FB.

JJ Irani · 24 September 2006, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank bullit

Well done Miner, that's the info' I was lookin' fer.
So! My dreams of a Seadweller complete with ol' Mr Cyclops are dashed!

....Or are they?

Thanks boys, FB.

Let them be dashed and remain so. The SD with a cyclops would be akin to having a new 350CLK with one of those huge spoilers on the trunk!!

miner · 24 September 2006, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank bullit

Well done Miner, that's the info' I was lookin' fer.
So! My dreams of a Seadweller complete with ol' Mr Cyclops are dashed!

....Or are they?

Thanks boys, FB.

Frank old chap
You could always wear a monacle just to spy the date on your sd

frank bullit · 24 September 2006, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miner

Frank old chap
You could always wear a monacle just to spy the date on your sd

Hey! Thats a good idea, I could have a large cyclops stuck to one side of my
diving mask!! That would look cool, wouldn't it?
I could give one of those hammerheads the ol' BIG EYE!

Frank.

miner · 24 September 2006, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank bullit

Hey! Thats a good idea, I could have a large cyclops stuck to one side of my
diving mask!! That would look cool, wouldn't it?
I could give one of those hammerheads the ol' BIG EYE!

Frank.

The hammerhead has the double cyclops though, something Rolex hasn't thought of yet...

astcell · 24 September 2006, 11:40 PM

In my scuba diving days the instructor covered waterproof watches. He told us that if a watch is rated for x number of feet, there is a way to calculate how far you can safely take it. For example if a watch is good for 300 feet then in reality it is not going to burst into pieces at 301 feet. In fact maybe it is good for 330 feet but the manufacturer added a safety zone. Then again maybe it is good for 270 feet because it is "close enough."

So for his example we assumed he had a watch rated to 300 feet. The first thing you do is chop that number in half. It is good to 150 feet. And that is if the watch is just sitting there minsing its own business. If you have it on your wrist and you are moving around, reaching here and there, swimming, grabbing, working, well chop the number in half again.

So if you dive to 105 feet (my lowest) he would say go ahead and take a watch rated to 300 feet at the very least.

Nowadays we have all these diving watches like Suunto, that are basically dive computers. Last time I talked to him he said these ones do not need their numbers chopped since they are dive machines to begin with. He agreed the same for other watches designed for diving. I guess this means the Sea-Dweller and Submariner get the nod for their real numbers but a Timex and a Casio may not. I'd wonder about my GMT, it does say "Oyster" after all. I should have asked him about other Rolexes last time we talked.

miner · 24 September 2006, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astcell

In my scuba diving days the instructor covered waterproof watches. He told us that if a watch is rated for x number of feet, there is a way to calculate how far you can safely take it. For example if a watch is good for 300 feet then in reality it is not going to burst into pieces at 301 feet. In fact maybe it is good for 330 feet but the manufacturer added a safety zone. Then again maybe it is good for 270 feet because it is "close enough."

So for his example we assumed he had a watch rated to 300 feet. The first thing you do is chop that number in half. It is good to 150 feet. And that is if the watch is just sitting there minsing its own business. If you have it on your wrist and you are moving around, reaching here and there, swimming, grabbing, working, well chop the number in half again.

So if you dive to 105 feet (my lowest) he would say go ahead and take a watch rated to 300 feet at the very least.

Nowadays we have all these diving watches like Suunto, that are basically dive computers. Last time I talked to him he said these ones do not need their numbers chopped since they are dive machines to begin with. He agreed the same for other watches designed for diving. I guess this means the Sea-Dweller and Submariner get the nod for their real numbers but a Timex and a Casio may not. I'd wonder about my GMT, it does say "Oyster" after all. I should have asked him about other Rolexes last time we talked.

Isn't the GMt good for 100m?? So at 105ft you'll (or the watch at least) will be ok.

astcell · 24 September 2006, 11:56 PM

Well the GMT is a pilot's watch, right? I guess if my plane is 105ft underwater I may have other concerns.

miner · 25 September 2006, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astcell

Well the GMT is a pilot's watch, right? I guess if my plane is 105ft underwater I may have other concerns.

Just save the watch!!

frank bullit · 25 September 2006, 01:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astcell

Well the GMT is a pilot's watch, right? I guess if my plane is 105ft underwater I may have other concerns.

So that's what they mean by aquaplaning!

Divers,shmyvers! We're all just poseurs, right? (forgot to insert 1/2 doz smilies here!)

FB.

Prince · 25 September 2006, 01:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank bullit

...Divers,shmyvers! We're all just poseurs, right?

Not JJ. He takes his diving in the tub with him...

frank bullit · 25 September 2006, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince

Not JJ. He takes his diving in the tub with him...

And he can still see the watchface thru' all that murkiness?! (LOTS of smilies here)

RogerF · 25 September 2006, 04:21 AM

Remember one thing though, the SD has a thicker crystal and if you add the cyclops there might be distortion with the date. Place the cyclops over the crystal and take a look before you commence gluing.

mailman · 25 September 2006, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Show me an SD with a cyclops and for the very first time in my entire life you'll hear these words: I HATE ROLEX!!

A SD with a cyclops would basically be a SS Sub Date tosser.

23 September 2006, 07:32 AM	#1
frank bullit Banned Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: england Posts: 100	Cyclops Hi, I saw someone say that cyclops can be removed by someone who knows what they're doing as it's only glued on. Does this mean a lens could be stuck onto a(n) SD? FB.

23 September 2006, 07:38 AM	#2
Launch Mini "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Real Name: John Location: Canada, eh Watch: can I? Posts: 6,241	In theory, yes. But I would guess that the re-gluing would be tricky. Getting the glue perfect so as not to have any blemishes between the two surfaces. Plus getting it on straight. BUT WHY? Once you take your SD down to those depths, the cyclops would fall right off. __________________ Something witty to go here. Member # 293

23 September 2006, 07:40 AM	#3
Launch Mini "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Real Name: John Location: Canada, eh Watch: can I? Posts: 6,241	In theory, yes. But I would guess that the re-gluing would be tricky. Getting the glue perfect so as not to have any blemishes between the two surfaces. Plus getting it on straight. BUT WHY? Once you take your SD down to those depths, the cyclops would fall right off. __________________ Something witty to go here. Member # 293

23 September 2006, 07:43 AM	#4
viper "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Northeast Posts: 943	just sell it & buy a sub then. unless you're a diver & the difference in water depth matters. btw, is is true that the SD a depth rating higher than even a diver can withstand? __________________ 16610LV 16200 116600 116500

23 September 2006, 07:49 AM	#5
Launch Mini "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Real Name: John Location: Canada, eh Watch: can I? Posts: 6,241	My swatch with 30 feet rating is more than I would ever go I think I have taken my Sub to about 7 feet down __________________ Something witty to go here. Member # 293

23 September 2006, 02:28 PM	#8
JJ Irani Fondly Remembered Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: JJ Location: Auckland, NZ Watch: ALL SOLD!! Posts: 74,320	Show me an SD with a cyclops and for the very first time in my entire life you'll hear these words: I HATE ROLEX!! __________________ Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!! I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!!

23 September 2006, 04:02 PM	#9
teton "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Real Name: Teton Location: California Watch: SS DJ Oyster band Posts: 67	For the record I love the cyclop on my Datejust. I just love looking at it. It's very unique and most watches these days no longer have this unique feature. -Teton

23 September 2006, 04:23 PM	#11
Gedanken "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Sir Location: Melbourne Watch: F-series SD Posts: 8,589	Yes, the Cyclops can be glued on. I'll leave the aesthetic side of the matter alone. I believe Comex's record dive depth was 503 metres, which is less than half of what the SD's capable of taking but more than the Sub's rating. __________________ You buy a Casio to make sure you're on time; you wear a Rolex because you don't have to be on time.

23 September 2006, 06:34 PM	#12
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 52,363	Yes agree with James but its got to be done correctly,and by someone who knows what they are doing.Its not a case of just dabbing a bit of glue then sticking it on. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

24 September 2006, 12:48 AM	#13
miner "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 1,294	This is from John Holbrook's sd review on his Rolex Reference Page (http://www.rolexreferencepage.com/).. "To accomplish this feat, Rolex employs a thicker sapphire crystal than is used in their other sport watches. Because of the added crystal thickness, their standard magnification cyclops used over the date window is rendered useless. It is for this reason that the Sea-Dweller does not have a date magnifier, and many prefer the cleaner look this brings to the Sea-Dweller dial"

24 September 2006, 11:40 PM	#19
astcell "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Robert Location: Angelus Oaks, CA Watch: 116713 Posts: 6,828	In my scuba diving days the instructor covered waterproof watches. He told us that if a watch is rated for x number of feet, there is a way to calculate how far you can safely take it. For example if a watch is good for 300 feet then in reality it is not going to burst into pieces at 301 feet. In fact maybe it is good for 330 feet but the manufacturer added a safety zone. Then again maybe it is good for 270 feet because it is "close enough." So for his example we assumed he had a watch rated to 300 feet. The first thing you do is chop that number in half. It is good to 150 feet. And that is if the watch is just sitting there minsing its own business. If you have it on your wrist and you are moving around, reaching here and there, swimming, grabbing, working, well chop the number in half again. So if you dive to 105 feet (my lowest) he would say go ahead and take a watch rated to 300 feet at the very least. Nowadays we have all these diving watches like Suunto, that are basically dive computers. Last time I talked to him he said these ones do not need their numbers chopped since they are dive machines to begin with. He agreed the same for other watches designed for diving. I guess this means the Sea-Dweller and Submariner get the nod for their real numbers but a Timex and a Casio may not. I'd wonder about my GMT, it does say "Oyster" after all. I should have asked him about other Rolexes last time we talked.

24 September 2006, 11:56 PM	#21
astcell "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Robert Location: Angelus Oaks, CA Watch: 116713 Posts: 6,828	Well the GMT is a pilot's watch, right? I guess if my plane is 105ft underwater I may have other concerns.

25 September 2006, 04:21 AM	#26
RogerF "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Duh! Location: Toronto Canada Watch: a gonna do? Posts: 2,573	Remember one thing though, the SD has a thicker crystal and if you add the cyclops there might be distortion with the date. Place the cyclops over the crystal and take a look before you commence gluing.

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