I like the look of the Rolex better.ezcheese wrote:Those comparisons are fun but in all honesty, I would take the topper halios collab over a white op. Look at this!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I like the look of the Rolex better.ezcheese wrote:Those comparisons are fun but in all honesty, I would take the topper halios collab over a white op. Look at this!
The level of finishing on the backside of the clasp and other weird places on a Rolex is extremely nice. Every part of the watch that touches your body is smooth and totally free of sharp edges. Rolex IS overpriced, but they're operating far out on the quality/price curve and that's always going to be expensive.
Haha. Ok.
I've had the same experience. While I'm shocked lately with Rolex pricing and how the AD's dole them out, I've never been disappointed with what you get in their products.JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 6:42 amAnd, based on my experience, I would expect the Rolex to keep time and be water tight without service 20 years from now. Rolex is expensive due to marketing. However, Rolex is also expensive because it's not "Swiss made" with parts from China and the durability is without peer.
Though, to be fair, it seems like every time they update the run of the mill movements they create issues. The 3035 based movements of various types were absolutely bulletproof.R@cerx wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:17 amI've had the same experience. While I'm shocked lately with Rolex pricing and how the AD's dole them out, I've never been disappointed with what you get in their products.JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 6:42 amAnd, based on my experience, I would expect the Rolex to keep time and be water tight without service 20 years from now. Rolex is expensive due to marketing. However, Rolex is also expensive because it's not "Swiss made" with parts from China and the durability is without peer.
Devils advocate here. Let’s take Halios or a Mido etc. $1000 I pay, and being completely hypothetical, let’s say after 5 years it completely craps out and can’t be repaired(which is unlikely considering it could get a movement swap etc), but let’s just go with it. I got 5 years for my $1000. So I buy another. I do this for 20 years, every 5 replacing it. That’s $4,000. Not $10,000 or more for a Sub.JP Chestnut wrote:And, based on my experience, I would expect the Rolex to keep time and be water tight without service 20 years from now. Rolex is expensive due to marketing. However, Rolex is also expensive because it's not "Swiss made" with parts from China and the durability is without peer.
Yes. The ceramics are clearly nice but I'm not sure they have the longevity and ease of use of the older models. An old Sub had a $75 insert that you could change at home with a butter knife.dukerules wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:42 amYeah Rolex quality is insane for what are really watches made to be used and abused, forever. My 15 year old 16600 has never been serviced, and I’m going to see how long I can go before it needs a service. But I’m still not sure how they justify $10K for a ceramic Sub.
There are tons of valid points of view on this. However, my GMT2 cost $3500 in 2005, hasn't been serviced, and is now worth three times that amount.tattoo chef wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:05 amDevils advocate here. Let’s take Halios or a Mido etc. $1000 I pay, and being completely hypothetical, let’s say after 5 years it completely craps out and can’t be repaired(which is unlikely considering it could get a movement swap etc), but let’s just go with it. I got 5 years for my $1000. So I buy another. I do this for 20 years, every 5 replacing it. That’s $4,000. Not $10,000 or more for a Sub.JP Chestnut wrote:And, based on my experience, I would expect the Rolex to keep time and be water tight without service 20 years from now. Rolex is expensive due to marketing. However, Rolex is also expensive because it's not "Swiss made" with parts from China and the durability is without peer.
I won’t argue the finishing. I’ve seen a lot of Rolex watches and for someone who does photography, they really are a step above when it comes to finishing.
But I’ve seen people with an Invicta or low end Seiko have a watch for 10 years without a service and the watch is still going strong as well. Just saying. Rolex is a great brand and they make a great watch, but they are priced so high to maintain that luxury status.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
It's annoying they seemingly messed up the 32xx. I wish my 124060 had the old 3130.JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:19 am
The 3035 based movements of various types were absolutely bulletproof.
I can't recall, have you owned one of the square cased Subs? If so, I know you have a fairly small wrist, how did that wear in comparison to your 41mm Sub?Chocodove wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:24 amIt's annoying they seemingly messed up the 32xx. I wish my 124060 had the old 3130.JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:19 am
The 3035 based movements of various types were absolutely bulletproof.
I like this post. You would have spent 4k over 20 years and what would be the value of those watches? My guess is they would be worthless. Trash. And there is a lot of data on ebay to back up the value of an old watch from an unknown manufacturer. Now how much is that Rolex worth 20 years later?tattoo chef wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:05 amDevils advocate here. Let’s take Halios or a Mido etc. $1000 I pay, and being completely hypothetical, let’s say after 5 years it completely craps out and can’t be repaired(which is unlikely considering it could get a movement swap etc), but let’s just go with it. I got 5 years for my $1000. So I buy another. I do this for 20 years, every 5 replacing it. That’s $4,000. Not $10,000 or more for a Sub.JP Chestnut wrote:And, based on my experience, I would expect the Rolex to keep time and be water tight without service 20 years from now. Rolex is expensive due to marketing. However, Rolex is also expensive because it's not "Swiss made" with parts from China and the durability is without peer.
I won’t argue the finishing. I’ve seen a lot of Rolex watches and for someone who does photography, they really are a step above when it comes to finishing.
But I’ve seen people with an Invicta or low end Seiko have a watch for 10 years without a service and the watch is still going strong as well. Just saying. Rolex is a great brand and they make a great watch, but they are priced so high to maintain that luxury status.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I have owned several of the 11 series Subs, a ceramic SD, and now have the 124060. The 124060 wears the best on my flat 6.5" wrist. While technically larger, I find the 21mm bracelet balances it better and the slimmer case is much more visually appealing to me. I am not one of the people that despises the 11 square case and would have no problem owning just one of those if it was the only option, but the slight changes to the 12 are big improvements to me personally (other than the movement).JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:31 amI can't recall, have you owned one of the square cased Subs? If so, I know you have a fairly small wrist, how did that wear in comparison to your 41mm Sub?Chocodove wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:24 amIt's annoying they seemingly messed up the 32xx. I wish my 124060 had the old 3130.JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:19 am
The 3035 based movements of various types were absolutely bulletproof.
I'd really like a blue Sub (either TT or YG) and hunting down a five digit that's worth adding to my collection seems like a giant PITA, so I'm thinking about the more modern ones. Maybe I'll start saving up after I'm not longer paying my divorce attorney so much money.
Rolex increasingly makes fewer watches that I would want to own at any price. Pepsi GMT2 on Jubilee, Daytona, 36mm DayDate, 36mm DJ on Jubilee with the new adjustable clasp, 36mm OP with the Tiffany dial, and the one that I may actually buy at some point -- the 36mm Explorer 1. Beyond those, I don't think Rolex makes a watch that I would keep if someone gave it to me. Not because they're bad watches or ugly designs. They're just getting bigger and bigger. A five digit Sub barely fits on my wrist, so a 41mm version isn't going to work. The 42mm Explorer was so big on me that the salesman agreed that I should forgot about that model, and that was back when they had to fight for sales.MDF wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:36 amThis is mainly why I have become such a Tudor freak, I really love a lot of their watches and the prices are fairly reasonable new and quite a bargain used. I already have the new no-date Sub. I would still love to get probably 3 Rolex models in the future (Explorer II Polar, GMTII Pepsi, Blue OP 41 can’t afford Daytona) but I’m not sure it will be worth it for me unless I can get them from an AD or at MSRP. For now I am really trying to just enjoy what I have.
My PO, or the similarly sized Speedmaster Pro, is the absolute max sized watch I can wear. The center portion of the end link that sticks out is basically right at the edge of my wrist so the bracelet drops straight down. If i wasn't weird about selling stuff, I'd sell it and buy a BB58 or the newer version due to the size.Chocodove wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:39 amI have owned several of the 11 series Subs, a ceramic SD, and now have the 124060. The 124060 wears the best on my flat 6.5" wrist. While technically larger, I find the 21mm bracelet balances it better and the slimmer case is much more visually appealing to me. I am not one of the people that despises the 11 square case and would have no problem owning just one of those if it was the only option, but the slight changes to the 12 are big improvements to me personally (other than the movement).JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:31 amI can't recall, have you owned one of the square cased Subs? If so, I know you have a fairly small wrist, how did that wear in comparison to your 41mm Sub?Chocodove wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:24 amIt's annoying they seemingly messed up the 32xx. I wish my 124060 had the old 3130.JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:19 am
The 3035 based movements of various types were absolutely bulletproof.
I'd really like a blue Sub (either TT or YG) and hunting down a five digit that's worth adding to my collection seems like a giant PITA, so I'm thinking about the more modern ones. Maybe I'll start saving up after I'm not longer paying my divorce attorney so much money.
The 116600 was probably my favorite of all, but I actually would have preferred longer lugs on the case like the five digit SD's. It wore like a stack of quarters on me. Loved looking at it, hated wearing it, moved it.
EDIT: If you can wear a 42mm 2500 PO, I don't think you would have any issue with a 41mm Sub.
You should really give the Pelagos 39 a try. You will love it IMO. Perfect size, great bracelet, great styling in my view.JP Chestnut wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:45 amRegarding Tudor, I'm increasingly interested. Especially now that they have the knockoff glidelock on the new BB. Even so, I really enjoy the silky smooth feel of all my Rolex references, and Tudor currently lacks that. It's hard to put my finger on what it is, but the backs of Rolex cases and the insides of the bracelets feel almost like they have baby powder on them, and Tudor doesn't.
I remember trying one on (before the craze and before they discontinued it, when you could buy one at a discount) and passed for the same reason.
I got mine BNIB and fully stickered, with card dated the day I bought it, for under $8k via grey. Those were the days...
I remember when Wu had one for sale. Complete, mint, unpolished, etc. I think he was asking $6700 and I passed because it seemed to expensive. I did at the time look closely at the dimensions and you're right that it was taller than a 16600 and i think the lug-to-lug was shorter. In any case, it something about it made me think that he would wear like a puck on my wrist, more so than my already puck like 16600.
Not everyone buys a watch as an investment. Most things depreciate. If I wear a watch for 5 years and cost me $1000 and it craps out I can buy another. Or if I just want another, let’s say I sold that watch for $250. Maybe a little more depending on condition and going rate. Well then it costs me $750 to wear a watch for 5 years years. That’s $150 a year if we break it down.charger02 wrote:I like this post. You would have spent 4k over 20 years and what would be the value of those watches? My guess is they would be worthless. Trash. And there is a lot of data on ebay to back up the value of an old watch from an unknown manufacturer. Now how much is that Rolex worth 20 years later?tattoo chef wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:05 amDevils advocate here. Let’s take Halios or a Mido etc. $1000 I pay, and being completely hypothetical, let’s say after 5 years it completely craps out and can’t be repaired(which is unlikely considering it could get a movement swap etc), but let’s just go with it. I got 5 years for my $1000. So I buy another. I do this for 20 years, every 5 replacing it. That’s $4,000. Not $10,000 or more for a Sub.JP Chestnut wrote:And, based on my experience, I would expect the Rolex to keep time and be water tight without service 20 years from now. Rolex is expensive due to marketing. However, Rolex is also expensive because it's not "Swiss made" with parts from China and the durability is without peer.
I won’t argue the finishing. I’ve seen a lot of Rolex watches and for someone who does photography, they really are a step above when it comes to finishing.
But I’ve seen people with an Invicta or low end Seiko have a watch for 10 years without a service and the watch is still going strong as well. Just saying. Rolex is a great brand and they make a great watch, but they are priced so high to maintain that luxury status.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
A lot of Rolex hate and I understand it but you can't deny they hold their value pretty well. Halios? Not so much.
+1
Former for me. I was flipping them at a loss way before the craziness started. I will always need a Sub or SD in my collection, as they define what a dive watch is to me. Reliable, accurate, and can take a beating. I never baby them.
Yes. I never sell, so value retention only means paying my wife more to go away. And I never buy unless I'm fine setting the money on fire. Sure, it's nice to know that my daughter will inherit a box of very desirable watches when I die, but the value is more of a hassle than anything else.