Submariner Date 41mm without cyclops (is it possible?)

[WilsdorfNDavis]

Originally Posted by joli160

The cyclops makes it a Rolex, I like them

So my 116600 isn't a real Rolex???

[offrdmania]

For those of you who are blown away that the cyclops is glued to the crystal, you will be even more blown away to know that the gold on a two-tone bracelet is also glued on.

[Big Tex Rolex]

Originally Posted by offrdmania

for those of you who are blown away that the cyclops is glued to the crystal, you will be even more blown away to know that the gold on a two-tone bracelet is also glued on.

What !!!???

[joli160]

Originally Posted by Big Tex Rolex

What !!!???

On the clasp that is

[George58]

its not glued on the clasp its fused on BIG difference

[Number3]

Originally Posted by George58

its not glued on the clasp its fused on BIG difference

But still occasionally falls off.

[OrangeSport]

Originally Posted by Bizcut1

Yah - it's one thing to ruin a cheap Steinhart. It's a crappy-looking faux-Rolex "homage" so no real harm done. ...

That’s a pretty ignorant comment

[stainlesssteelsteve]

THIS IS EXTREMELY HELPFUL! I may attempt this. Will keep you all posted.

Steve

Originally Posted by Mendota

The cyclops is just affixed with UV glue. Yes, you can remove it but with the way they applied the AR coating on the 11 series watches there was a cyclops shaped spot of AR underneath the crystal. The cyclops itself also had a layer of AR underneath it, so the two layers combined created that black hole effect on an otherwise non-AR crystal. There are some pics of what happens if you remove it as well as a copy of the Rolex spec sheet for the AR cyclops crystal here: https://minus4plus6.com/116710.php#cyclops

I have read that the new 12 series subs actually have a full AR crystal now, so "in theory" that would mean that the entire underside surface of the crystal has the AR coating. Then the cyclops itself has a layer of AR underneath it to still create that additional clarity through the cyclops from the double AR. "In theory" removing it should not produce the goofy looking results that happened with the 11 series crystals.

You won't know until you try it! Good luck and report back. Worst case is you then just go try to source a 124060 crystal at your AD and have them swap it in for you.

Back in the day, with the 1680 you could choose which plexi you wanted. You could choose a T19 dome or a super dome, or take the standard top hat plexi. Personally, I think the domes look so much better on the 1680 than the top hat does. Night and day.

[Warningshot]

Wondering how this turned out? Keep us posted.

[subprimero]

Trade for a Sea-Dweller.

[dannyboy123]

How does one do the opposite....? I have a Linde Werdelin that would really benefit from a Cyclops as icant read the dawn date as its to small.......

[DeVille]

As others have posted... get an OEM no-cyclops crystal and have a watchmaker swap it out, whilst retaining the OG if you decide to sell later on.

[majidessa]

Personally I would not touch a 10k watch and make any mods to it, the cyclops is part of the watch DNA, Rolex has become more of a expensive jewelry rather than a tool watch.

If you don't like the cyclops why don't you to trade it with ND Sub and have some cash in your pocket.

[Xpatcan1]

purchase a 116600 40mm sea dweller, great watch with similar dimensions to the 41mm sub, no cyclops, tapered lugs, matte dial.

[Vesper Lynd]

I would have bought the latest Sea Dweller with the classic design. 116600

[4BostonB]

I've always thought that removing the cyclops leaves the date positioned awkwardly on the dial - too close to the center.

[slus]

I saw a Explorer II with the cyclops removed and it looked so perfect it made me weak in the knees. Also seen photos floating around Instagram of a SD43 sans cyclops, also looked perfect. I'm a big fan of dates without the cyclops, both of mine left the factory that way but I am certainly not against discussing the modifications, much better than another ridiculous investment or shortage thread. Modifications used to be a lot more common before the hype and $$$ took hold.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=232427



https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=626915

[DeVille]

Originally Posted by slus

Also seen photos floating around Instagram of a SD43 sans cyclops, also looked perfect. https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=626915

THIS is how it should've been from the factory...

[Chiboy]

Originally Posted by m j b

I recently bought a Steinhart Coke GMT, and because I don't like the wart, I removed it myself. I was a little hesitant, afraid that I would damage the watch, but I did it, didn't ruin the crystal, the case or anything...

Before and after pics below.

I used a heat gun, a sharp utility knife and a lot of "Tarminator" which is the same as any of your "goo gone" type products to remove the residual glue.

Admit it. This was a "warm up" act before using the heat gun to peel off the Steinhart logo and implant a Rolex one!

[Daveclock]

This guy, not far from the chisel method - and on an EXP-II

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNnxKrf820g

I would advise crystal change with watchmaker - or just wait for AD (that is Anno Domini) to advance and you will be glad you kept it!

[Curated]

Have had my 16610 for almost 10 years....the cyclops always bothered me and I ended up wearing the Sub sparingly in rotation with other watches. After a recent full RSC service I decided to get rid of the cyclops....to me this is how the Sub should have always been. It now looks like a proper tool watch which is how I treat it and an added bonus is that I can read the date from all angles. I have a newfound love for the Sub and to me I much prefer the 5 digit Sub over the newer ones.

2024-02-12 13.18.37.jpg

[WilsdorfNDavis]

Originally Posted by Curated

Have had my 16610 for almost 10 years....the cyclops always bothered me and I ended up wearing the Sub sparingly in rotation with other watches. After a recent full RSC service I decided to get rid of the cyclops....to me this is how the Sub should have always been. It now looks like a proper tool watch which is how I treat it and an added bonus is that I can read the date from all angles. I have a newfound love for the Sub and to me I much prefer the 5 digit Sub over the newer ones.

That's why I love the 116600!

[Curated]

Originally Posted by WilsdorfNDavis

That's why I love the 116600!

Yes the 16600 and 116600 are both great. If I could go back 10 years I'd probably pick up a 16600 instead of the 16610. Alas I already had the 16610 so figured why not remove the cyclops and see how I felt...a new one could always be put back on.

[bluestreak]

I have the LV and love it but hate the cyclops. Trying to decide if it’s worth it to replace the crystal or trading it in for a No date and sourcing a green bezel

[dukie748]

Only way I'd do this is to replace the crystal itself with a no date variant - that way you can always replace it later if you choose - and you don't have to worry about banging about on a $10k watch or issues with the AR coating.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by 4BostonB

I've always thought that removing the cyclops leaves the date positioned awkwardly on the dial - too close to the center.

I always thought that too until they moved it closer to the rehaut on the latest gen DSSD, now I think the old offset date window is cool. Go figure.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by 1William

I believe the answer is yes on the cyclops removal or the replacement of the crystal. Talk to a independent watch maker and see what they say. I would be tempted to by an OEM crystal from a ND and have it switched out and keep the OEM. Down the road you could include it in a package with a sale or trade or just switch it back should you desire. Great watch.

This is the way.

[Curated]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

I have the LV and love it but hate the cyclops. Trying to decide if it’s worth it to replace the crystal or trading it in for a No date and sourcing a green bezel

Pop it off….you will love your watch that much more. You can always have a watchmaker put a cyclops back on or get a new crystal.

[Scottyboy]

Originally Posted by Curated

Have had my 16610 for almost 10 years....the cyclops always bothered me and I ended up wearing the Sub sparingly in rotation with other watches. After a recent full RSC service I decided to get rid of the cyclops....to me this is how the Sub should have always been. It now looks like a proper tool watch which is how I treat it and an added bonus is that I can read the date from all angles. I have a newfound love for the Sub and to me I much prefer the 5 digit Sub over the newer ones.

Attachment 1419406

Sounds like you bought the wrong watch, if you'd have bought a proper Submariner (14060 /M or 114060), you would've loved it right out of the gate.

[GONZO2LR]

Originally Posted by zengineer

Today is the 28th...all day, tomorrow the 1st, add one to that each day.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

What if i forget the date.....i just look at my sub...there it is..Duhhhhhhhhh..