Why not have a glide lock clasp on more models?

[Dotell]

I just got my wife a Date 34 for her birthday and it has the comfort extension link like I suppose all of the Datejusts.

I have a new Submariner with the glide lock clasp and I absolutely love that feature. Especially when I´m taking long flights (I get swallen) or during heatwaves. Also when training when abroad, I can strap the watch on the outside of the jacket when I go for runs etc. etc.

After getting used to the glide lock clasp, I kind of feel sorry for my wife for only having the comfort extension link which only adds about 5mm in flexibility.

It also makes me have reservations about getting a GMT II which I´ve wanted since it doesn´t have the glide lock clasp.

Am I overthinking this or am I not the only one?

[topgear1985]

I agree that it should be on all models that have the Oyster bracelet. It's mainly due to Rolex positioning the Submariner and Sea Dweller as "tool" watches for diving..the Glidelock can extend to accommodate wearing it over a wet suit. It was a big selling point for me to buy a 114060 over a 14060; I'm in Texas and the Glidelock in the humidity is perfect...I agree with you that it should be on more pieces though.

[SpyShops718]

For Rolex to come out with them in the future and make more money.

[Sub King]

This is pure speculation, but I think it may have something to do with Rolex wanting to preserve their tool-watch watch heritage and history. By keeping the Glidelock “diver extension” exclusively for dive watches, they are reminding everyone of their rich diving past and also the utilitarian nature of their watches.

If they put it on all of their watches, it removes the entire exclusivity of the Glidelock as a special feature for diving. It would just become viewed as another regular clasp.

[LuminousMaximus]

for 95% of situations the Easylink, found on Daytona, DJ, GMT II and other Rolex models, if properly fitted, would serve just fine and without the additional bulky feel of the Glidelock. Now, I'm not saying the Glidelock is bulky, just more bulky in comparison to the Easylink, and all more bulky than the president...In my opinion...

Also, these models that use the Easylink, tend to lay flatter on the wrist also helping with fitment. I think...lol

[douglasf13]

Because it's too large and bulky. They should come with a smaller version like Omega.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by LuminousMaximus

Now, I'm not saying the Glidelock is bulky

It depends on the person and we've seen posts from people for whom the clasp is just too large or too wide to be comfortable.

That may be a small population, but those people are out there.

What would be nice is if Rolex would offer the Glide-Lock as an option for more watches, but I think we all know what the likelihood of that is.

[mattjmcd]

I appreciated the similar feature in the Pelagos. Definitely wish it was available on the GMTII’s.

[lhawli]

Simple! Not all models are divers...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[brucethemanlee]

If given the chance I'd take glidelock on all my rolexes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tig00s1783]

I love how I can adjust my sub with the glidelock. When I wear my Batman I always feel like it can use just a slight adjustment without taking out another link.

[Smarties]

Different watches, different features. Marketing strategy!

[GBD]

Rolex could easily make a shorter glidelock for non-divers. The range of travel on the sub glidelock is *enormous* and could be shortened and still have plenty of adjustablilty.

[Dotell]

Originally Posted by GBD

Rolex could easily make a shorter glidelock for non-divers. The range of travel on the sub glidelock is *enormous* and could be shortened and still have plenty of adjustablilty.

Exactly. The non divers could have half of the divers’ glide lock range and still be better than the extention link.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk