Lower Mag Date Magnifier Preference?

[Fleetlord]

Anyone prefer the lower magnification?



This may just be the new magnification standard. The WG Pepsi pictured here is factory FRESH and just came to the dealer yesterday. It wouldn't make sense for Rolex to use two different magnifiers, so this must be it going forward.. get used to it!!!

[skeen]

You're right - it doesn't make sense. And yet, here we are.

[WelshBoy]

Nope, it looks stupid as the cyclops is magnifying the dial not the date! It's also not the norm going forward.

[Chadridv]

I personally would prefer no mag, to lower mag. The cyclops is arguably an eye sore, especially to purists. If there must be a cyclops it should at least work as originally intended.

I stopped by the AD the other day and saw about 8 sports watches lined up all with different cyclops mag! Pretty crazy.

[Fleetlord]

Originally Posted by WelshBoy

Nope, it looks stupid as the cyclops is magnifying the dial not the date! It's also not the norm going forward.

Sure it is. This watch is factory fresh. They are all coming in like this now..

The WG Pepsi is an elite model in the lineup. if 1.5x is good enough for this...

[jernigan78]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

Sure it is. This watch is factory fresh. They are all coming in like this now..

The WG Pepsi is an elite model in the lineup. if 1.5x is good enough for this...

I dont think this is a "norm". Rather a slip up by Rolex QC. My brand new BLNR has the normal mag, as does a BLRO that is at my AD. Hard to say what is going on.

[Tools]

I don't have a preference either way.

I have been wearing GMT's for decades and they have always had a slightly smaller mag than some of the other models..

I think that it's a non-issue that a small number are very vocal about.

[sco]

No, I don't like it. I would not be happy with lower magnification.

[handsfull]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

..... It wouldn't make sense for Rolex to use two different magnifiers, so this must be it going forward.. get used to it!!!

It's called a 'mistake'. Even Rolex can have them.

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

Sure it is. This watch is factory fresh. They are all coming in like this now..

The WG Pepsi is an elite model in the lineup. if 1.5x is good enough for this...

It's not good enough, it's called an error. I was just at my local dealer yesterday, and they brought in 8 new watches. 1 out of the 8 had the faulty mag cyclops....the rest were just fine. Guess that debunks that theory.

BTW: The ones the with the correct magnification were either DD's in gold or PM sub's/GMT's. The errored cyclops was in a sub LVC.

[VinnieVegas]

I don't care for it.

[douglasf13]

I'd say 2.5x mag or no cyclops at all. In between just looks bad.

[Dante1972]

If it isn't 2.5x magnification I wouldn't accept it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[soundserious]

nope sorry, low mag is a deal breaker for me

[watchwatcher]

I would prefer 2.5x mag, but it wouldn't be a deal breaker if I could get my hands on that PepC...

[skeen]

Originally Posted by Tools

I think that it's a non-issue that a small number are very vocal about.

You're wrong. It's a very real issue, and it affects a large batch of watches out there in windows today.

[Sublover2166]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

Anyone prefer the lower magnification?



This may just be the new magnification standard. The WG Pepsi pictured here is factory FRESH and just came to the dealer yesterday. It wouldn't make sense for Rolex to use two different magnifiers, so this must be it going forward.. get used to it!!!

Wrong answer. Not going to get used to it and certainly wont buy a new watch with that absolutely pitiful magnification. Rolex has a bad batch of Cyclops, but they certainly aren't going to admit it to anyone.

[RichM]

Unacceptable..

[CHRONOLEX]

Sorry I couldn't resist wading into this yet again. OP's thesis is debunked simply by the fact that Rolex has willingly replaced crystals on random serial watches and resulted in the characteristic large mag. If this were the new standard, there wouldn't be another set of crystals available. Their answer would just be "this is how we do it now, sorry" and you'd see them all look that way. I've seen hundreds of watches with varying sizes and to your point, I've seen two brand new "factory fresh" BLROs with very different mags.

[lodewijk]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

Sure it is. This watch is factory fresh. They are all coming in like this now..

The WG Pepsi is an elite model in the lineup. if 1.5x is good enough for this...

Well, not entirely true. When I picked up my BLNR they had two factory fresh BLNRs in stock; 1 with no mag and 1 with a normal 2.5 mag ..

[WelshBoy]

Dealers in the UK have actually been instructed to remove "defective" mag watches from their displays and return them to Rolex for replacements with the correct mag, so guess you got duped! It may be factory fresh watch, but has been sat somewhere for a while. Take it back and get an exchange for the "correct" mag or get the crystal swapped at a RSC or live with your "defective" mag but either way keep on trolling, people are biting.....

[Fleetlord]

Originally Posted by CHRONOLEX

Sorry I couldn't resist wading into this yet again. OP's thesis is debunked simply by the fact that Rolex has willingly replaced crystals on random serial watches and resulted in the characteristic large mag. If this were the new standard, there wouldn't be another set of crystals available. Their answer would just be "this is how we do it now, sorry" and you'd see them all look that way. I've seen hundreds of watches with varying sizes and to your point, I've seen two brand new "factory fresh" BLROs with very different mags.

So they simply sourced some 1.5x mags by accident and they are continuing to produce FRESH watches with those under specified mags until they run out?

ROLEX would knowingly use under specified components in production just to use them up?

Is it the other way around? 2.5x are on their way out and 1.5x is what we will see after 2.5x are gone?

[Fleetlord]

Originally Posted by WelshBoy

Dealers in the UK have actually been instructed to remove "defective" mag watches from their displays and return them to Rolex for replacements with the correct mag, so guess you got duped! It may be factory fresh watch, but has been sat somewhere for a while. Take it back and get an exchange for the "correct" mag or get the crystal swapped at a RSC or live with your "defective" mag but either way keep on trolling, people are biting.....

Proof? Instructed by whom?


Duped?



Huh?

[CHRONOLEX]

Maybe water is on its way out and wine is the new standard.

[CHRONOLEX]

I took my BLNR to RSC NY and when I pointed it out their direct quote was "we agree we can do better." Interpret that however you want.

[WelshBoy]

Instructed by Rolex! Proof? All the defective watches have been removed and now all displays show watches with "correct 2.5x" mag!
Duped! Yup, go figure! Best get it fixed dude!

[IT Nerd]

A low mag cyclops would drive me nuts.

[VinnieVegas]

Originally Posted by CHRONOLEX

I took my BLNR to RSC NY and when I pointed it out their direct quote was "we agree we can do better." Interpret that however you want.

Did they change the cyclops at no charge, under the waranty?

[HogwldFLTR]

The Mag on my new DJ II is stellar but I do get the sense that the Cyclops isn't perfectly aligned with the dial opening. There is definitely a rotational error. I wonder how many look at this alignment and what the specs are at Rolex on this. I'm certain they must have a placement spec of some sort.

[Loevhagen]

When I now look at second hand Rolex watches - those having the small mag issue is of no interest to me.

[West]

Originally Posted by WelshBoy

Dealers in the UK have actually been instructed to remove "defective" mag watches from their displays and return them to Rolex for replacements with the correct mag, so guess you got duped! It may be factory fresh watch, but has been sat somewhere for a while.

Not so sure about that. I tried on a Sub LVC in Watches of Switzerland in Cardiff the Friday before last that had just been delivered that day. I pointed out to the sales guy that it had the smaller mag and he shrugged and said it was pretty random what magnification would be on the watches they recieve at the moment. No mention made of having to return any.