Daytona: what you don't like

[kans86]

Well I know it is regarded as the grail Rolex by many. But just wonder if there is any feature of the Daytona that you don't like.

I myself have owned many Daytonas, 4, 5 and 6 digits. I love them but really there is a feature which I don't like about them which is the crown guard on the 5 and 6 digits. In my opinion the crown guard looks ugly, and I also can't see the real need for this feature. Why Rolex just can't give the 5 and 6 digits the same case without crown guard as the 4 digits.

[GolfPunk]

I think it’s a perfect watch

[oroloi]

You can't get them, thats what I don't like

[lord91]

I don't like the tachometer bezel. People barely use the chrono function, imagine that bezel.

Rolex should replace it with one like on the Explorer (or ceramic), no printing on it, brushed surface and polished edges .

[Onikage]

A date would be nice. Not at 4 though. Maybe unobtrusively at 6. It was omitted from the El Primeros even though the capability was there. Rolex should have included it when they went inhouse. Still a great watch, I just like a date.

[hhtwaijri]

Interesting. Mine is the 6 digit Daytona.

I love tool watches... A Daytona would be a perfect tool watch. But the polished steel all over the watch and bracelet, makes it a bit too shiny for my taste for a daily beater.

If the Daytona has the same polished: unpolished ratio as the submariner, it would never leave my wrist.

Still, it is my favourite watch in my collection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vernplum]

I'm not keen that the second hand is on a small dial while the stopwatch hand is the big one and doesn't move when you aren't timing something.

[EDITED, but leaving my dumb statement here for you all to laugh at :)]
"I'm sure there is sound reasoning for it, but I don't like it."

should have been more along the lines of:

"why couldn't the stopwatch hand be a true second hand when it is not in chronograph mode?'

[Onikage]

Originally Posted by vernplum

I'm not keen that the second hand is on a small dial while the stopwatch hand is the big one and doesn't move when you aren't timing something. I'm sure there is sound reasoning for it, but I don't like it.

It's called a chronograph. The hand corresponds to the bezel.

[vernplum]

Originally Posted by Onikage

It's called a chronograph. The hand corresponds to the bezel.

Yes of course, but viscerally and visually I'm so used to a 'proper' second hand. :)

[Manu74]

I miss the date function.

[AK797]

I would like a panda dial on the D500s, esp after seeing that steel dial mod triumph. Must confess I did have a little looksy for the dial last night.

[Brew]

I don't care for ceramic bezels, and screw-down pushers don't make sense to me. Either the piece can be used in the water or it can't.

[Spoonage]

Wish the crown side lugs were the same size as the non-crown size.

[zack777es]

Originally Posted by oroloi

You can't get them, thats what I don't like

Originally Posted by Onikage

A date would be nice. Not at 4 though. Maybe unobtrusively at 6. It was omitted from the El Primeros even though the capability was there. Rolex should have included it when they went inhouse. Still a great watch, I just like a date.

Originally Posted by Manu74

I miss the date function.

I love all Daytonas (including the Rainbow, except the Cheetah )

But as some mentioned above, I wish:
1. I can afford a 4 digit reference in the near future
2. the SS Daytonas are more readily available (at retail price!)
3. they introduce a date function at 6 (but i'm still 50/50 on this; would want to see how they execute it and how it will affect the dial aesthetics)

[zack777es]

Originally Posted by AK797

I would like a panda dial on the D500s, esp after seeing that steel dial mod triumph. Must confess I did have a little looksy for the dial last night.

This

[JacksonStone]

- No date

- I have no use for a tachymetre scale, but it's perhaps the most defining feature of the watch

- I would prefer a timing bezel

- Screw-down pushers are annoying

- Size is a bit small for a chronograph, per my own preferences

I honestly don't get the massive appeal of the Daytona. The ceramic ones are sharp looking, but functionally I think they leave a lot to be desired. If I were seriously wanting a mechanical chronograph, I would consider another brand besides Rolex.

[padi56]

Not a fan of any modern day Daytona great movement but that's about it in my book.Myself much prefer my 6263 now if they ever made a homage to the 6263 with the cal 4130 and aluminum black insert then perhaps I could buy one.Until IMHO it's a very over hyped watch, yes they have always been hard to get at retail since 2000.Perhaps its that fact that makes them for some a must have, a bit of C##' waving or brownie points, not a fan of ceramic inserts on any watch

[justdate]

The lack of date ruins the functionality of the watch for me. Need a date!

[peterpl]

Originally Posted by justdate

The lack of date ruins the functionality of the watch for me. Need a date!

Hahaha yep I'm another one that "needs" at a minimum date function on all my watches.

If they did a Daytona with a date maybe I would consider one.

[ratty]

I wish the scale on the bezel started at 50 units instead of 60, more useful for me.

I could certainly do without screw down pushers. It would be easier to use without these.

I wish you could get a brushed version of the case and bracelet.

All of these features were available on older versions of the Daytona. For me the sweet spot, at least looks wise, of the Daytona range were the late 1980 / early 1990s watches, although they did have the screw down pushers.

[torrente]

In my white DaytonaC I do not like legibility to the point that I am considering flipping it.
I would prefer less text in the dial, this apply to all current Rolex watches.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by kans86

Well I know it is regarded as the grail Rolex by many. But just wonder if there is any feature of the Daytona that you don't like.

I myself have owned many Daytonas, 4, 5 and 6 digits. I love them but really there is a feature which I don't like about them which is the crown guard on the 5 and 6 digits. In my opinion the crown guard looks ugly, and I also can't see the real need for this feature. Why Rolex just can't give the 5 and 6 digits the same case without crown guard as the 4 digits.

I'm not a fan of the skinny lugs on the crown side on the SS and all YG models. Supposed to create aesthetic balance but it doesn't work for me.

I'm also not a fan of the SS bezels, much preferring the arrangement of the markings on the PM and ceramic bezels.

The WG on the other hand is perfect.

[Rocco21]

Only thing I don’t like about Daytona is the grey market price

[TonyYu]

Having a date will make perfect.

[Chester01]

I use and need access to the chrono function for my job, often using it several times a day. The screw down pushers are problematic. I also don’t like the PCL’s.

[1William]

I don't like the size at 38.5. I have owned several SS, TT and YG and RG. If the watch was 42mm if would be perfect for me.

[marc2828]

My issues with the Daytona:

Should be 42mm
Hands should be larger..hard to see time
PCLs ...much better brushed
Glidelock
Should be able order one



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[watchdisplay]

Great watch but I’d like a date. I also prefer the 5 digit dials the most.

[justdate]

Oh and also the fiddly screw crowns on chrono are very annoying, by the time I have unscrewed them, the thing I wanted to time is over. Much preferred my AP chrono where the buttons were always ready to go.

[R G]

I love the Daytona.

With the older steel bezel versions, the white dial is my favourite, yet with the newer ceramic versions, the black dial looks better in my opinion.

I want to like the white dial on the new model but I think it’s the black sub dials that I’m not as keen on.

I’m aware I will be in the minority there.