or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 3063  

post #45931 of 48312
BTW, I have seen that crazy Rolex wrist tattoo countless times on the different watch forums, but it never fails to startle me.
post #45932 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post
 


Not to complicate things on an "if/when", but I'm holding off my Rolex purchase until I hear about plans of Rolex incorporating the new 3 day power reserve movements in to some of their other models. The Sea Dweller 4000 is the one on my list. As I am pretty good with rotating my watches, the longer PR is a big deal for me personally.

 

A question I have is does anyone think that Rolex will 'shrink' the DJII into a 40mm case for Basel '16? (similar to the DDII this yr)

 

I know 1mm isn't that big a deal but I think I'd be annoyed if I buy the current model only to have a 40mm released next yr (I really like the fit of my BLNR & my 40mm Ingenieur)

post #45933 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by IGotId View Post
 

 

A question I have is does anyone think that Rolex will 'shrink' the DJII into a 40mm case for Basel '16? (similar to the DDII this yr)

 

It doesn't matter what we think.  Year after year I've seen so many people on other forums post incorrect predictions about what Rolex will release at Basel.  Only Rolex knows for sure what they will offer in 2016.  If you would prefer a DJ that is 1mm smaller, all you can do is wait and see (and maybe pray). 

post #45934 of 48312

I saw a beautiful Royal Oak Chronograph in the wild today while shopping around in Charles Thrwhitt. I just want to be in my new apartment so I can make the move on a no-date Submariner and stop walking past Tourneau every day while glaring looking through the glass.

post #45935 of 48312
Have to say I'm slightly impressed: Milgauss is running about 1 sec/day, or even less, straight out of the box.
post #45936 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by IGotId View Post

A question I have is does anyone think that Rolex will 'shrink' the DJII into a 40mm case for Basel '16? (similar to the DDII this yr)

I know 1mm isn't that big a deal but I think I'd be annoyed if I buy the current model only to have a 40mm released next yr (I really like the fit of my BLNR & my 40mm Ingenieur)

It’s just a matter of time before the 32XX movements replace their 31XX counterparts across the range; the date-only 3235 is already in service with the Pearlmaster 39. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s been deliberately limited to one expensive niche model at the start to allow for production refinements before ramping up the output for bigger-selling models.

IMO, the 1 mm difference isn’t that big of a deal either, though it’s a step in the right direction. What I find more significant is that the proportions are a definite and noticeable improvement — especially with the bezel. It’s a safe bet that there’s a Datejust II replacement on the way with a similar profile.

When will this happen? Well, considering that Rolex managed to keep a lid on releasing a completely new movement for 2015 — despite all the people, equipment and documentation that would certainly have been involved with change — it’s a waste of time to even speculate on something as comparatively minor as a model update.

In any case, a 3235 update is coming sooner or later, and if you’re annoyed at the thought of having the present version before this even happens, then you probably aren't ever going to be satisfied with a Datejust II. Though if you’re really keen on having a big DJ right now, you could wear one at essentially no cost in the meantime by buying secondhand and selling it whenever the new one becomes available. smile.gif

But why not just wait for what you really want? It sounds like you already know that the other one's going to be a substitute.
post #45937 of 48312

That's my hope on the 32XX move. I'm going to remain patient, deal with price hikes, whatever. I'd like to get exactly what I want in this case because it appears extremely likely that it will be available, and not that far down the road.

post #45938 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post
 

That's my hope on the 32XX move. I'm going to remain patient, deal with price hikes, whatever. I'd like to get exactly what I want in this case because it appears extremely likely that it will be available, and not that far down the road.

Sometimes there is a cost (including price hikes) to waiting for what you really want, because there is a value to having what you truly want rather than settling for a substitute. 

 

I'm sure the new movements will make their way through the range.  Its simply a matter of when.  Typical Rolex practice is the changes start in the higher priced models and then work their way down the range.  

post #45939 of 48312
I appreciate all the thoughts/comments regarding the new Rolex movement. Going to have to give this some thought; I'm inclined to give it a bit of time to try to get a feel for how quickly it's being rolled out.
post #45940 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcg View Post

I appreciate all the thoughts/comments regarding the new Rolex movement. Going to have to give this some thought; I'm inclined to give it a bit of time to try to get a feel for how quickly it's being rolled out.


Use the time to try on the different versions. Give the SD4000 a try too. Enjoy the search, the watches aren't going anywhere.

post #45941 of 48312
I will say that I've always enjoyed the Daytona's longer power reserve, but given the way that I wear my watches (constant rotation, basically) ... a shorter power reserve is no deal-breaker.

Generally speaking, I'm all for upgrades (whether from Rolex or any other manufacturer) when they are justifiable, and the price increases are in accordance with whatever improvements that have been made. (What an inelegant sentence. Somebody fix that for me smile.gif).
post #45942 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post


Use the time to try on the different versions. Give the SD4000 a try too. Enjoy the search, the watches aren't going anywhere.

That one I've tried. While I'm admittedly a sucker for overbuilt features I'll never have any need for smile.gif, the extra thickness and cost aren't worth it to me. Also, having a thinner wrist, a larger watch would end up being less versatile for me.

That said, I do like the inclusion of the date window without the cyclops.
post #45943 of 48312

While it is certainly thicker, I find it looks smaller from above and has much better lines. I certainly don't need the additional features, it's aesthetics for me. And I like the no cyclops date.

post #45944 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post


Generally speaking, I'm all for upgrades (whether from Rolex or any other manufacturer) when they are justifiable, and the price increases are in accordance with whatever improvements that have been made. (What an inelegant sentence. Somebody fix that for me smile.gif).

 

You know, I'm questioning whether I'd really want to think about moving from one watch to another as something that can be considered an "upgrade."

 

Given that

 

A) Art is something that is enjoyed for form more so than practicality

B) Art is desirable for the subjective emotional response it evokes more so than the objective function it provides

C) Objects of art may provide some function

D) High-end* watches do provide some function, yet are enjoyed primarily emotionally and for their forms

 

We can conclude that

 

E) High-end watches are objects of art

 

 

*"High-end" referring to an object that costs significantly more than similar objects that perform the same function at an easily attainable price which are, therefore, purely practical.

 

And following that.

 

1) An "upgrade" refers to obtaining an object of greater functionality than one of a similar form, currently owned

2) Only objects enjoyed primarily for their objective functionality may be upgraded

3) Objects of art are objects of subjective emotional enjoyment and not objective functional enjoyment

4) high-end watches are objects of art

 

It stands that

 

5) High-end watches cannot be "upgraded"

post #45945 of 48312

Perhaps selling a work by a good artist to help fund one by a greater artist, is an upgrade of sorts?  But I agree the term seems rather cold.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)