Why doesn't Rolex make a diver with GMT?

[haakon59]

I have always wondered about this since there are quite a few dive watches by other brands that have the GMT function like Blancpain, Chopard, Breitling, Omega, Limes, Doxa, Eterna, etc.. It seems to me that if you are sailing especially, this would be a useful function. Maybe I am wrong about that. Regardless, I have always wanted to see a Submariner GMT and Sea Dweller GMT version. I realize that the GMT II models are water resistent to 100 meters already and that most recreational divers are not going to go down past 33-50 meters at most. Maybe there is no demand for it and this is just my private fantasy. What do you guys think? Am I way off or is this a model others would like to see also?

I thought the ExpII and the GMTII are both waterproof to 100m.

Rolex makes GMT dive watches.

[haakon59]

Originally Posted by Atomic

I thought the ExpII and the GMTII are both waterproof to 100m.

Rolex makes GMT dive watches.

Yes, I mentioned the GMT II in my post above.

Originally Posted by haakon59

Yes, I mentioned the GMT II in my post above.

I know. I think they don't make a GMT version of the Sub because then Rolex can sell you two watches for the price of two watches.

[padi56]

Agree with Atomic above Rolex makes GMT,sailing and dive suitable watches,though not really classed as a dive watch technically.And why would you need the GMT function underwater.And would doubt if 75% of all the brands of diving watches out there, see anything deeper than there local pool.And today most divers use a computer,like myself backed up by a watch. Most dive watches today,especially some of the quartz models will give far more diving related information than any simple time lapse bezel.

[astcell]

I would love to see the result of an illicit affair of a SD with a GMT. Then again maybe Rolex figures that not many divers cross multiple time zones during a dive.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by astcell

I would love to see the result of an illicit affair of a SD with a GMT. Then again maybe Rolex figures that not many divers cross multiple time zones during a dive.

HELP!! Robert's caught my fever, guys!!

[Rockrolex]

Originally Posted by astcell

I would love to see the result of an illicit affair of a SD with a GMT. Then again maybe Rolex figures that not many divers cross multiple time zones during a dive.

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

HELP!! Robert's caught my fever, guys!!

OMG, I think we need to quarantine both of you before others start to catch this dread disease.

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by Rockrolex

OMG, I think we need to quarantine both of you before others start to catch this dread disease.

Quarantine? I think one of then needs a full frontal lobotomy! It is because of my good taste I don’t mention any names.

[ginzo]

The GMT is a pilot's watch designed by or for Pan Am pilots in the late fifties. True to its form there would be no need to make it a diver's watch.

[mailman]

Originally Posted by ginzo

The GMT is a pilot's watch designed by or for Pan Am pilots in the late fifties. True to its form there would be no need to make it a diver's watch.

Technically it is. You can wear one up to 100m. How many people that own one will ever go down that far?

[mike]

Originally Posted by ginzo

The GMT is a pilot's watch designed by or for Pan Am pilots in the late fifties. True to its form there would be no need to make it a diver's watch.

I think that's the issue. Rolex historically has made watches to fulfill a specific need.
The forerunner of the Submariner to address the needs at the time of the diver.
As you correctly state the GMT to fulfill a request from the airlines to have a multi-timezone watch for commerical pilots.
The orginal Explorer II--1655-- for those explorers needing a way to track day and night.
Even the orginal explorer for those whose lifestyle or vocation made abnormal demands.
"Cross pollination" if you will was not something deemed necessary in a "tool watch".
While Rolex may have it's faults--what company doesn't--conceptually they have, for the most part, remained true to an "equiment specific" philosophy.

[haakon59]

Quite a few manufacturers make a diver with GMT function. I listed only a few above. But I have to laugh when someone talks about Rolex not having a Dive/GMT watch because you don't cross any timezones when diving. Is that why you think I am asking?

[haakon59]

Originally Posted by ginzo

The GMT is a pilot's watch designed by or for Pan Am pilots in the late fifties. True to its form there would be no need to make it a diver's watch.

Honestly, I am not quite sure what you mean here. I never suggested making the GMT Pilot watch into a diver, I suggested making their diver with a GMT function.

[mike]

Originally Posted by haakon59

Quite a few manufacturers make a diver with GMT function. I listed only a few above. But I have to laugh when someone talks about Rolex not having a Dive/GMT watch because you don't cross any timezones when diving. Is that why you think I am asking?

Oh no, not at all.

My only point was that Rolex has traditionally made "need" specific watches.
Another example is the Daytona. Orginally designed for the racing community it doesn't have a date yet many manufactures employ a date feature in their chronographs. Rolex hasn't.
My guess is it's simply their philosophy.

[haakon59]

Originally Posted by mike

Oh no, not at all.

My only point was that Rolex has traditionally made "need" specific watches.
Another example is the Daytona. Orginally designed for the racing community it doesn't have a date yet many manufactures employ a date feature in their chronographs. Rolex hasn't.
My guess is it's simply their philosophy.

I am glad you cleared that up for me because I was under the impression that you might have thought that the reason I was interested in a diver with a GMT function is because I felt the need to check time zones while underwater. Of course, I have many divers and I wear them in all kinds of situations, not just underwater, (I don't always have time to change watches before going to my office after a swim) and the GMT function is useful in other contexts. I make international calls all the time, as just one example. But I do now understand the point you were making about how you see Rolexes' design philosophy and this is a point I appreciate your bringing up. I hadn't thought about why Rolex doesn't include a day function on their Daytona Chronograph, for example, and your explanation makes sense. Thanks for clearing this up.

[astcell]

I guess if the Rolex Daytona came out in 1913 they would have included the date feature.

[Gedanken]

Mike's spot-on with this one.

Personally, I'm not in favour of superfluous bits on a watch. For example, the helium valve on the SMP has always annoyed me - that thing doesn't go down deep enough to need the valve.

[Subfiend]

Having taken long distance dive trips, I agree that having a multi-time zone function is very useful while at sea. I have also used my GMT-II for diving.

Not meaning to offend anyone, but all this talk about the philosophy of Rolex making specific watches for specific needs seems a bit far fetched to me. Certainly that may have been the original reason for making one particular watch over another, but I don't believe that Rolex would not make a diver with a GMT function to "preserve" a philosophy from the 1950's.

I think the answer is much more simple. They don't need to add these functions to make sales, so they dont.

In addition, if they did make a diver with a GMT function, who would buy the GMT II? The only philosophy they are employing in my view is the philosophy of selling the most watches they possibly can, and there's nothing wrong with that.

[astcell]

Well there are those of us who fly AND dive, but this way Rolex gets us to buy TWO watches! Smart marketing on their part.

[ginzo]

Originally Posted by haakon59

Honestly, I am not quite sure what you mean here. I never suggested making the GMT Pilot watch into a diver, I suggested making their diver with a GMT function.

OK, I did misunderstand your original meaning, I agree a diver's watch with a GMT (multi-time zone function) would be useful and brings up a good topic for discussion.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Not meaning to offend anyone, but all this talk about the philosophy of Rolex making specific watches for specific needs seems a bit far fetched to me. Certainly that may have been the original reason for making one particular watch over another, but I don't believe that Rolex would not make a diver with a GMT function to "preserve" a philosophy from the 1950's.

I think the answer is much more simple. They don't need to add these functions to make sales, so they dont.

In addition, if they did make a diver with a GMT function, who would buy the GMT II? The only philosophy they are employing in my view is the philosophy of selling the most watches they possibly can, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Good points, Al...have to agree with you!!

[mike]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Not meaning to offend anyone, but all this talk about the philosophy of Rolex making specific watches for specific needs seems a bit far fetched to me. Certainly that may have been the original reason for making one particular watch over another, but I don't believe that Rolex would not make a diver with a GMT function to "preserve" a philosophy from the 1950's.

I think the answer is much more simple. They don't need to add these functions to make sales, so they dont.

In addition, if they did make a diver with a GMT function, who would buy the GMT II? The only philosophy they are employing in my view is the philosophy of selling the most watches they possibly can, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Excellent observation Al, and most certainly no offence taken by me my friend.
I would agree Rolex has certainly made a shift from days of old. They themselves have said they are a manufacturer of "luxury"" watches as opposed to the "tool watch" concept touted in the past.
My point being Rolex historically has hung their hat on relatively few models of watches, and by in large stayed with those references over the years as opposed to the frequent introduction of new models or limited editions as other brands have done.
Rolex is a very conservative company (whether that is viewed as good or bad) seeming to make changes that are evolutionary in nature rather than following a trend.
In all It's years Rolex has only dropped two models from the sports-- line-the orginal Turn-O-Graph, due to the popularity of the GMT and evolution of the Submariner and the Milgauss.
In these days of digital this and computer that the use of a watch as a primary device is an idea that perhaps is gone.
Sadly, it seems that one of the main evolutionary changes Rolex has made is to simply raise the price.