Land-Dweller in Stainless Steel..is it for you?

[mpkRolex]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

Ref: 127334

Attachment 1494499

Some say the new movement is a small miracle, its revolutionary from a technical standpoint from Rolex and definitely elevates the brand in terms of horological significance. Its a high beat movement with less traditional materials, but with a very good power reserve.

However, is it a watch that you would want to wear?

Its more akin to a Date-Just than a professional model such as a GMT or a Submariner in appearance and style.

The bracelet is beautiful as is the case but one couldn't say they were qualitative improvements over the Oyster cases and Jubilee or Oyster bracelets.

The dial comes in just one colour again with a stick dial somewhat similar to the stick markers on a Date-Just except for the honeycomb pattern. The hands are somewhat unarticulated stick hands which will be interesting to see how legible they are in real life to discern from the white dial background and each other.

Again the fluted bezel is a usual Date-Just feature.

So whilst it may be a technically groundbreaking model, I can't say its a watch I would care to wear in preference to a several other Rolex models (GMT, Date-Just (with my colour choice) Submariner and of course Daytona).

Nope it’s ugly. When that hidden clasp bracelet (not the integrated) makes its way to a DJ may be


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fflump]

It could be an elegant watch with a smooth bezel, solely baton markers, a plain dial and without the date/cyclops. As it is it is too fussy and the design elements don't mesh. Great bracelet and movement though

[GradyPhilpott]

If the Rolesor Land-Dweller didn't have the sapphire case-back, the superfluous, gold rotor, and if it cost a mere $9,000, I'd eat Vienna sausages and saltine crackers for a month, just so I could buy the first one to come available.

Seriously.

[DandyAnt]

A pass from me too

[AK797]

Its growing on me, suspect it will look and feel quite good in the flesh, esp with open caseback, love to see darker dials to contrast with the SS more.

[Michael T]

As I read through the comments, looks like a very tepid response from many of this post’s prolific responders here, which I take notice over. I have always liked the 1530.

While I could do without the busy dial in the launch watches, I think with a conventional black stick dial, it would look great. I think I will get on a list, but given my lack of status at any of the local AD’s (Sadly for both me and the AD’s staff, my AD went away in the AD consolidation) god knows where I will be in line. Hopefully, the elevated price vis-a-vis the DateJust, will temper demand.

[fluffybunny]

Originally Posted by Nairn1980

If it were fluted DJ money, I’d be interested. The fact it’s Sky-Dweller money puts me off. I’d much rather have a sky-dweller.

I’d agree with this if the Sky-Dweller was a more wearable size. But it’s not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[scotttampa]

Not a big fan.

[fluffybunny]

Originally Posted by Mystro

The look is not what I want my Rolex to be. I may be too set in my ways of how I see my Rolex watches.
Would a collection with a AP in it own one is the question??

I’ve put my name down for one and I have a Royal Oak. So yes.

To the other comments on price and how much more expensive this is than a Datejust, I have a different take. To me, this is massively cheaper than a Royal Oak, with even longer heritage, and given Rolex’s history, I expect it will be much more reliable and easier to service. And without the AP client “experience”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[samson66]

I still can't get past that name

It would be like naming a diving watch "Pool-Swimmer"

[OSUBaller]

Originally Posted by douglasf13

It’s quite interesting that second hand prices of the 1530 look to be about where msrp of the LD is. To me, the deal is the 1630, if one can stand two-tone. They’re going for what seems to be less than half of the 1530.

Great catch on the LD using the chapter ring found on the 1530 and 1630. My understanding is that these two references were "placeholders" until they finally got the movement for the OQ's ready. It also appears, that they chose some less than top quality materials (especially for the 1530's) for the dial/chapter ring, as many examples found today are substantially weathered/patinated.

I think a fun "Frankenwatch" project would be to nab one of these references but replace the dial/chapter ring with a better DJ dial (either from this time period or modern). This however, might require a new crystal, given that the date window might set differently given the chapter ring.

Cheers!

[GolfJunkie]

I like the case and bracelet but the dial is just too busy for my liking. Pass for me.

[goldboy]

Very interested. On the list and owner of the AD working on it for me

[Jack T]

Originally Posted by FTX I

Not even for free

Wait a second...I don't dislike the watch, the movement seems to be an advancement, and it is rather tarted up with bracelet, bezel and dial, but...we all have our price, and mine is 'free' !!

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Jack T

Wait a second...I don't dislike the watch, the movement seems to be an advancement, and it is rather tarted up with bracelet, bezel and dial, but...we all have our price, and mine is 'free' !!

lol

[hojlund]

Originally Posted by GolfJunkie

I like the case and bracelet but the dial is just too busy for my liking. Pass for me.

all that matters is this land dweller has immense potential , the case shape, bracelet and the movment all blend in together beautifully. sure there is room for improvement on the dial side, I'm sure rolex will come up with some nice dial iterations down the road. however, no matter how not desirable is this dial, this is the first ever ss rolex in history equipped with a display caseback(not to mention the all new ground breaking movement), every serious collectors would already want one in their collection.

[worldofoyster]

i will stick with Subs and GMTs

[Cru Jones]

Originally Posted by Krash

I have a silver DJ41 that basically serves the same purpose. So the Land-Dweller is not a watch I’m going to want to acquire.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Infinitely more beautiful watch.

[georgekart]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

is it a watch that you would want to wear?

I think it's a pointless question before we get our hands on one and try it on. I may say I don't like it based off of photos, but I will absolutely love it on my wrist. I do like how it looks, though. I still prefer the look of other models, but that doesn't mean that the land-dweller looks bad (the name does sound bad, though).

[derklink]

Cool watch but too dressy for my taste. My wife though likes it.

[Go Bucs]

Without even seeing it in person I would sayin a word it is feminine, maybe that was their intent though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kenny G]

I don't hate it...but I'd never buy it.

Perhaps some new configurations in the future will change my mind.

[Joelbryceanderson]

No but the rose gold is nice!

[Lol-x]

Originally Posted by georgekart

I think it's a pointless question before we get our hands on one and try it on. I may say I don't like it based off of photos, but I will absolutely love it on my wrist. I do like how it looks, though. I still prefer the look of other models, but that doesn't mean that the land-dweller looks bad (the name does sound bad, though).

Thanks for your pointless response

[tomallen]

NO, not my cup of tea. The dial is cheap looking. The watch looks like Rolex has run out of ideas for a new watch.

[Wilco68]

Originally Posted by worldofoyster

i will stick with Subs and GMTs

And there in a nutshell you have the conservative mindset of the vast majority of Rolex wearers.

If they had put minimal effort in & relaunched the Coke the excitement levels on this forum would have been off the scale, yet they launch a new reference with host of new features for the first time in years, & the response is well…..meh…

All Rolex needs to do is makes watches with 1) a plain dial colour 2) Use either batons or circles in a uniform way as hour markers 3) ensure the bezel has two colours on it or go full green 4) Keep to the two strap types Oyster & Jubilee. Variations on those themes would make 90% of Rolex owners happy.

Stick to the ‘icons’, the classics, think of the heritage, the history. For heck’s sake don’t think of the future or trying something different……!!

Above is contentious I know, but for the time I’ve been on this forum after every Watches & Wonders there’s a general consensus of ‘that was a bit of a let down, nothing new yet again’. So Rolex launches something new & the consensus is generally one of derision. There’s only so many ways you can vary the DNA of a Rolex tool watch….

[thegrandseirolexguy]

It’s a great looking watch. There’s no escaping the fact that it does look derivative of the Tissot PRX.

Though I feel the real star of the show is the new escapement and movement.

There doesn’t seem to be enough discussion about what an achievement it is to come up with an entirely new escapement system.

Frankly, there aren’t many non Swiss lever escapement designs that made it into serial mass production. Omega co-axial, Grand Seiko dual impulse and now Rolex Dynapulse.

Innovation isn’t dead at Rolex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Wilco68

And there in a nutshell you have the conservative mindset of the vast majority of Rolex wearers.

If they had put minimal effort in & relaunched the Coke the excitement levels on this forum would have been off the scale, yet they launch a new reference with host of new features for the first time in years, & the response is well…..meh…

.....

Above is contentious I know, but for the time I’ve been on this forum after every Watches & Wonders there’s a general consensus of ‘that was a bit of a let down, nothing new yet again’. So Rolex launches something new & the consensus is generally one of derision. There’s only so many ways you can vary the DNA of a Rolex tool watch….

Nice post and I agree with you. Problem is they have proven over the last decades they are capable of making great looking watches but all that innovation came in a controversial looking watch to put it mildly. IMHO of course.

[GW44]

Originally Posted by fluffybunny

I’d agree with this if the Sky-Dweller was a more wearable size. But it’s not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you missed off "But it's not for me"

Anyone with a 7" wrist (and just under/over that) can easily carry off a Skydweller.

[fluffybunny]

Maybe. I’m definitely in the slim wristed brethren and generally prefer smaller watches. But I think Rolex missed a trick not making the Sky-Dweller in the 38-40mm range. I had one - really wanted it to work as I think it’s possibly the best complications on any watch - but just too big (for me). I’d still argue too big period but I take your point. To each his own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk