Old BLRO way more vivid than the new one

[kizerman]

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

The only ceramic insert that's better is black .
Aluminum beats all the rest on colour .

The issue is people want to compare the bezels as if they were supposed to look the same. It's a new reference from a different material that was never intended to, or expected to replicate the aluminum.

If you like the aluminum better, buy a 5 digit GMT but don't hate the 6 digit just because it's not the same as the 5 dig.

[Asumer]

So I agree sort of. Like it or not rolex is using ceramic bezels that are shiny in the new sports models. Either you like them or not, your choice. Also having had the blnr I would say its just as blingy as the blro, polished center links, shiny ceramic bezel etc. I like the blnr but wish it didnt have the pcls. I like the blro as well but to compare the two (to 4 digit and 5 digit gmts) its apples to oranges. I feel like purists(some) wish rolex never went to solid bracelets or even moving to ceramic. Ceramic never fades but breaks easier than aluminum bezels. Ratty hollow link bracelets strerch but are lighter than solid modern bracelets. Its all about tradeoffs and personal choice.

[Seaswirl]

Originally Posted by MiloDiThernan

Is it wrong to object to the bland visual of the ceramic BLRO? Ceramic BLRO fans just say yes, offering no insight. ‘Yes’. Did anyone who replied ‘yes’ actually think before typing? Maybe the people with single word answers should try a little harder to explain themselves, for this reason. If you’re going to take an argument on, ask yourselves if you’re going to change minds with your answer. Otherwise, why bother?

Ok.

[Pinchy]

Agreed. Wouldn't say no for retail. But I'm currently looking for a 16750 and will pay the premium.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by HL65

Yes.

My exact thoughts.

[BumbleB]

To each his own.

Yes the old one is more vivid.

It’s a very subjective argument which one is better.

If i had liked the more vibrant/fruity colours, I would have bought the old version.

I prefer the ceramic one as the colours are more subtle.

If you know what you like and you don’t compromise, you’ll be happy with your choices.

There’s no right or wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Harry-57]

I was offered a BLNR and in the metal it looked a lot nicer than 2D photos suggest. I was impressed but not tempted. Compared to its BLRO sibling it is rather dull to my eyes.

As to the 5 versus 6 digit comparison, something for everyone, each to their own. I thought the 5 digit bracelets and clasps really let them down. You could buy better quality for less money in any multi brand dealer.

[OG1982]

Originally Posted by kizerman

Since you asked, you are wrong.

There is a reason the demand for the BLRO is greater, and to he honest, if the BLRO was readily available, almost nobody would be buying the BLNR, no matter how hard they lobby here.

The limited BLRO hate stems from those who cannot acquire it and those who settled for the BLNR.

Not true. The BLNR colours are bold, crisp and exactly what they should be. They really ‘pop’ and look good. The BLRO on the other hand is a poor relation, the colours don’t look but the masses seem to prefer if as it’s more colourful than your normal Rolex.

If my AD called me today and said I’ve got a BLRO on jubilee, I’d politely decline because it’s nowhere near as nice as my BLNR.

Believe it or not, there are Rolex owners out there that stick to their own eyes as barometers of what they like. Not everyone has to follow the hype train.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mg18]

Originally Posted by Ollie1982

Not true. The BLNR colours are bold, crisp and exactly what they should be. They really ‘pop’ and look good. The BLRO on the other hand is a poor relation, the colours don’t look but the masses seem to prefer if as it’s more colourful than your normal Rolex.

If my AD called me today and said I’ve got a BLRO on jubilee, I’d politely decline because it’s nowhere near as nice as my BLNR.

Believe it or not, there are Rolex owners out there that stick to their own eyes as barometers of what they like. Not everyone has to follow the hype train.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be fair, sometimes price does not equal demand. In Toronto at least, I visited a few dealers who confirmed that although the BLRO commands a slight premium, the BLNR is what most people come in and ask for. Everyone wants a "batman" they said. I believe both are hyped fairly equally. I believe the BLNR has more mass appeal though, especially among your average rolex buyers.

Another thing that was mentioned to me, at least at my local watchfinder, was that they get 1 BLRO for every 5 BLNR. Whether that means BLNR are more common, or BLRO owners simply do not flip as much, we will never know.

[007timer]

Originally Posted by remrk

I have both and I agree the ceramic is not as vivid, but it’s also a reason why I like it. They’re different enough to warrant wearing them for different occasions.

I always look for a reason to “buy both” approach. I am filing this for future use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by MiloDiThernan

I’ve had enough. I’ve spent 18 months looking and trying to believe, or convince myself, that the ceramic BLRO is a faster, better, more vital version than the aluminium bezel version it replaced. It isn’t. The colours are washed out. By contrast, I sold the Oyster BLNR, for one reason or another (a 116503 MOP) and missed it so much that I had to buy a replacement, on jubilee. The BLNR is vivid. The ceramic BLRO will not stand the test of time; it is not a worthy successor to the 5 and 4 digit versions. Am I wrong?

No you are not wrong. The 4 and 5 digit BLRO/Pepsi are arguably the most timeless and iconic of all Rolex models. The current BLRO fails to better, or even match, the older models in regards to color and proportions. The only redeeming quality of a new BLRO is that it can be traded straight across for a very nice full set 16710 ;)

[1665fan]

1675>16710 no lug holes> ceramic blro

[Wrist Watcher]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

No you are not wrong. The 4 and 5 digit BLRO/Pepsi are arguably the most timeless and iconic of all Rolex models. The current BLRO fails to better, or even match, the older models in regards to color and proportions. The only redeeming quality of a new BLRO is that it can be traded straight across for a very nice full set 16710 ;)

Personal opinions and preferences and having multiple choices make this hobby fun. My personal opinion is that I could not imagine paying BLRO prices for the old, rattling bracelet and aluminum bezel 16710. I want to "feel" quality on my wrist for that amount of money, and you definitely "feel" the quality with the new references while you do not with the old versions. Again, this is just my opinion.

[franktehtank]

Originally Posted by kizerman

Since you asked, you are wrong.

There is a reason the demand for the BLRO is greater, and to he honest, if the BLRO was readily available, almost nobody would be buying the BLNR, no matter how hard they lobby here.

The limited BLRO hate stems from those who cannot acquire it and those who settled for the BLNR.

I actually find the BLNR to be nicer looking than the BLRO. I also know many people who feel the same. And I own neither, but would like to own either.

[mike morris]

like BLRO in mk1 , today my vote BLNR , blue color best and blue hand i prefer.

[Pinchy]

Originally Posted by franktehtank

I actually find the BLNR to be nicer looking than the BLRO. I also know many people who feel the same. And I own neither, but would like to own either.

My preference was the BLNR so that's what I got. It's blue is spectacular. The BLRO is not. The pepsi is nice but it doesn't POP.

[Dr.Brian]

I’m with you, I prefer the old style as well.
Colors, case, dial, everything.
Well maybe not the clasp, but it works fine, so I’ll give it a pass.

[Cryptochonos1]

The older one seems to me to be more purple-ish

[Cryptochonos1]

The new oyster is way more blue to me

[Cryptochonos1]

I don’t know if they are using a different ceramic or coating but if someone knows the answer that would be very helpful.

[dkast85]

Originally Posted by IR201

I fully understand what you're saying in terms or vivid or not versus the older pepsis and the BLNR. My version of the BLRO is rather muted looking. The red is rather dark and the blue more of a dull navy. It's still a special watch but if you're looking for vibrant colors it may not be the one. Perhaps the MK1 version.

i have to say that i have seen many different BLRO's and the colors never seem consistent. It's weird. It's an issue I have not met with BLNR's or CHNR's.