Rolex Datejust - stuck between two variations

[grimslade]

I know it wasn't your question, and further none of my business, but why are you set on a Rolex? there are so many great watches out there...

 

[neato]

I like the design of that particular watch and I know Rolex makes good, durable watches that last decades (in my grandmother's case, over 50 years). My father has had one for years, and I guess there's a like-father-like-son thing going on as well. Plus, they seem to be easy to sell at a good value if I want a new watch in the distant future.

If I had unlimited funds, I'd get a Patek Philippe Calatrava or a unique Complicated Watch.

 

[grimslade]

I think both watches are tacky, honestly. But I would definitely go with a one-tone over the two-tone if I had to choose.

 

[Tantive4]

With the SS/WG Datejust, the entire bracelet is SS, it's just that the center links are polished, only the bezel is WG. That's why there's a big difference in price between a SS/WG and a SS/YG Datejust. White and rose gold are usually more expensive, but in the Datejust there is very little WG.

At that pricepoint, if you're not totally in love with a Datejust, there are alot of other alternatives.

At half the amount, Ulysse Nardin makes some nice SS watches on straps.

You can find an Audemars Piquet Millinary or for a little bit more a SS Royal Oak.

You can definately find a JLC, and if you look hard enough you can find a Patek Calatrava BNIB for around 10K.

Please don't take me wrong, I'm not a Rolex hater, I have three vintage pieces. Although, if you really want a Datejust, start looking around for a really good vintage piece. The style hasn't changed much in the 50 years its been in production (except for the new polished lugs and solid gold center links), but an older acrylic cyrstal datejust has something special about it.

 

[neato]

The Millinary model always looked too cluttered to me. I also don't like the octagonal shape of the face of the modern Royal Oaks.

LeCoultres don't interest me that much and a Patek Calatrava (even a preowned one) is out of my price range. I'm looking for something under $3000 (preferably, under $2000).

I did not know that the WG/SS model had a completely SS bracelet. That's interesting. Do you think the WG bezel adds to the watch or hurts the watch? I'm worried about a color/material clash. I've seen the WG/SS model before and just assumed that the bracelet links that were polished were WG.

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by grimslade

I know it wasn't your question, and further none of my business, but why are you set on a Rolex? there are so many great watches out there...

What he said.

Jon.

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by neato

The Millinary model always looked too cluttered to me. I also don't like the octagonal shape of the face of the modern Royal Oaks.


All RO's have the same dial design, (round) exactly like the original Genta RO.

Jon.

 

[neato]

The dial is round with the RO, but the bezel (the metal surrounding it) makes the whole face look octagonal to me.

 

[imageWIS]

Originally Posted by neato

The dial is round with the RO, but the bezel (the metal surrounding it) makes the whole face look octagonal to me.

Perception is one thing, but it is round.

Jon.

 

[Tantive4]

I personally think that the fluted bezel on SS/WG Datejust looks fine.

The only other thing would be a milled SS bezel on SS Datejust, but that looks better with an Oyster bracelet and not the Jubilee.

 

[Artisan Fan]

I personally think that the fluted bezel on SS/WG Datejust looks fine.

Same here. It's very beautiful.

 

[neato]

I guess I'll have to try on the WG/SS model.

 

[imageWIS]

Anything is better than this:

I think Rolex wanted to call it the "˜Massive Train Wreck' but there wasn't enough room at the bottom of the bezel.

Jon.

 

[Aristocrat]

Well you got to give them credit for hiring the chinese-kids as designers instead of replica-makers!

Back to topic, check out the rose gold!

 

[Master Shake]

Jon,

As a Rolex wearer, even I have to agree that that watch is hideously large.