Daytona Flyback?

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by swish77

Interesting breakdown. Again, I'm not saying it's crystal clear from a quick glance, but it can indeed be identified accurately.

If the minute sub-dial hand is just past the zero on 10, 20 or 30, you know it's 11, 21 or 31 (or 1). If it's on that first hashmark past a zero, you know it's 12, 22, or 32 ( or 2).

Design-wise, if there was an extra hashmark in there at the 1, 11, 21, it would be too crowded, I think, and even harder to read.

I guess that’s my point, it’s tough (and my eye sight is perfect) And for me while at work, I had to speculate one time and was unsure of the precise time. If i stair at the watch and watch the minutes go by, I can follow. But to start the timer and then look at it later in practice is difficult at best and when the time matters as it does at work for me-legibility is not optional. That’s why I switched to my Speedmaster for work (plus more under the radar)

The models in the 70’s and 80’s the hash marks were all there and set up differently. And for me, this is where Rolex started to prioritize form over function. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a beautiful looking watch, highly balanced, and quite versatile (btw i like the black dial better than the white in the ceramic models).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[usmc_k9_vet]

Originally Posted by Chester01

I guess that’s my point, it’s tough (and my eye sight is perfect) And for me while at work, I had to speculate one time and was unsure of the precise time. If i stair at the watch and watch the minutes go by, I can follow. But to start the timer and then look at it later in practice is difficult at best and when the time matters as it does at work for me-legibility is not optional. That’s why I switched to my Speedmaster for work (plus more under the radar)

The models in the 70’s and 80’s the hash marks were all there and set up differently. And for me, this is where Rolex started to prioritize form over function. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a beautiful looking watch, highly balanced, and quite versatile (btw i like the black dial better than the white in the ceramic models).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just curious, but if it is absolutely necessary for you to quickly, properly, and accurately time things for work purposes, why don’t you just use something simpler and more modern, like the timer on an iPhone? I understand it is cool to be able to actually use the complications on your watch, and I really like complications that I actually use on a daily basis, but I’ll be the first to admit, I don’t actually need a watch on my wrist with any complications at all; not even hours and minutes. I’m getting into this whole watch use and collection game because I enjoy them for what they are, possibly what they were once critically used for, and the engineering and build quality that goes into them, but if I had to rely on something to time things for work purposes, it would no longer be a mechanical watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ratty]

Originally Posted by Chester01

Well hard to read is an understatement. I was using my Daytona to time something at work and could not tell how many minutes elapsed. This is especially problematic between 9 to 12 minutes then again between 19 to 22 minutes.

And I agree about the date I have a speedmaster and had the Daytona and the dials do look cleaner.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can I ask what you time at work?

All instruments I had to use for work had to be approved, issued and regularly checked and calibrated. I'm curious why you use your own watch for timing something which sounds important?

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by usmc_k9_vet

Just curious, but if it is absolutely necessary for you to quickly, properly, and accurately time things for work purposes, why don’t you just use something simpler and more modern, like the timer on an iPhone? I understand it is cool to be able to actually use the complications on your watch, and I really like complications that I actually use on a daily basis, but I’ll be the first to admit, I don’t actually need a watch on my wrist with any complications at all; not even hours and minutes. I’m getting into this whole watch use and collection game because I enjoy them for what they are, possibly what they were once critically used for, and the engineering and build quality that goes into them, but if I had to rely on something to time things for work purposes, it would no longer be a mechanical watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well first my Speedmaster fits the bill best. Secondly, my iPhone does not hold a great charge these days, thirdly, the iPhone requires you to either tap the screen then stop the timer allowing for time to keep ticking, or with a passcode required me to enter that then to stop the timer with even more time going by. Lastly, I don’t always have my phone on me (growing up in the 80’s we got by just fine without them). So in sum, my watch remains far better for my work than the other available alternatives.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by ratty

Can I ask what you time at work?

All instruments I had to use for work had to be approved, issued and regularly checked and calibrated. I'm curious why you use your own watch for timing something which sounds important?

So, I work in healthcare and so many tests for example assessing neuropsychological status require you to time the task. These times translate into standardized scores, so if you are off by a couple seconds, the score is different. So often I am called to do many of these, each day. Now these require precise timing, but not down to the 1/10 of a second and so chronograph is fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ratty]

Originally Posted by Chester01

So, I work in healthcare and so many tests for example assessing neuropsychological status require you to time the task. These times translate into standardized scores, so if you are off by a couple seconds, the score is different. So often I am called to do many of these, each day. Now these require precise timing, but not down to the 1/10 of a second and so chronograph is fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the reply.

I'm surprised that you can use your own watch to time something when + or - a few seconds is significant.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by ratty

Thanks for the reply.

I'm surprised that you can use your own watch to time something when + or - a few seconds is significant.

Exactly. That’s why when you need a show pony go Daytona, when you need precision, go Speedmaster pro.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Greg 59]

Originally Posted by usmc_k9_vet

I agree. I like the black dial as well, but keep going back to the blue. I’m honestly not even a big fan of chronos as far as the complication goes because I like complications I actually use and, realistically, I don’t really need a chrono, but that one is just so aesthetically perfect (in my opinion) and I actually like that it has the addition of the date because I look at my watch quite often to determine what the date is.

Anyways, you’re right about the blue dial, angled chapter ring, and complimentary sundials. Stunning! I’m also a big fan of the stainless bracelet. I’d likely wear it evenly on the stainless bracelet and rubber strap, then the alligator leather strap infrequently.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My sentiments exactly. The features that attract you are the same for me. I don't have a need for chrono either but like you eluded to, they add another layer of aesthetics to what is already a stunning watch.