Simplicity versus Complexity

[patek5107]

What is meant by best when one is looking for the best movement in a Rolex? I shall first give my definition and then offer my personal guidelines on how to qualify a Rolex for that definition. Perhaps we shall then see whether any of you agree or have additional suggestions: I consider best Rolex movement to mean most enduring, and accurate mechanical movement. Often an owner of a Rolex wants it to last not only for his life time, but for future generations in his family line. He also wants it to be accurate. In a man's watch, the simpler a Rolex chronometer is, the more accurate and durable it is likely to be. The fewer moving parts there are the less there is to go wrong at some time in the future and the easier things are to repair. The the greater the number of parts and the longer the chain of moving parts that is connected to the mainspring of any watch, the more friction is created and the more points there are that are subject to fluctuation, thus more wear and less accuracy.



For this reason and for others, a Daytona would be my last choice in a modern Rolex. The most rugged Rolexes are of course the all stainless steel specialty or sports watches such as the Sea Dweller (number one), the Submariner, the GMT, and the Explorer. MY PERSONAL FAVORITE IN AN EVERYDAY SPORT AND WORK ROLEX IS THE SUBMARINER WITHOUT DATE. Not only is it the simplest but it has the most attractively balanced dial and whether I'm SCUBA diving, sky diving, or scaling a cliff. I am not concerned that it doesn't indicate the day of the month. IT IS A SERIOUS PROFESSIONAL'S WATCH, as are all of those listed above. Whenever the month changes from 31 days to 30, 28, or 29 on a date watch, the owner must adjust his watch thus disturbing the stem and crown O-ring seal. Look at all the potential leaks on the Daytona and all other watches that have more than just a simple crown. While this has little to do with the movement itself I must digress a bit in order so point out certain things about durability of the case and wristband.



Many prospective owners however, would like the the more luxurious gold or two tone watches. My preference in these would be the Submariner and the GMT. These are not made without the date feature unfortunately. Please keep in mind that the purer the gold is the softer and less durable it will be. one should choose the watch with the lowest gold purity level. 11k is much more durable than 18k. 21k is pure gold. even 9k (if it were available in a Rolex) would still be non corrosive and would maintain its luster longer than softer gold, and would not be so subject to scratches and wear as would a watch made from more pure gold. To me such a watch should not only be a luxury, but it's practicality as a professional tool should not be compromised. Because of the size of the movement, no woman's watch can qualify as highly in durability or accuracy as the men's Rolex watches above. Further, whether flying one's own airplane, SCUBA diving, Sky diving or just trying to see the dial in subdued lighting, if a woman wants a serious professional working and sports watch, she should buy one of those listed above and have the wristband adjusted to fit her wrist by the dealer at the time of sale. More women today are wearing men's watches than ever before. A woman can do this without raising eyebrows. James Bond wearing a woman's Rolex would raise eyebrows! ;-)

[Dr. Robert]

I think this guy must have worked for Real Simple magazine.

[smallcandle]

Well, haven't we been busy this afternoon. Guess what? I didn't read this novel either...

[HL65]

He's back for more....

[Idle Swede]

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

I think this guy must have worked for Real Simple magazine.

Send him an e-mail and ask.

hiromi_kirishima@yahoo.com

[springbar]

Yet another unasked-for and unattributed copy-and-paste from http://penangtalk.com/rolex/.

[patek5107]

It is an excellent article and deserves time here.

[Speed]

Call me Ishmael. Some years ago- never mind how long precisely- having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world. It is a way I have of driving off the spleen and regulating the circulation. Whenever I find myself growing grim about the mouth; whenever it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul; whenever I find myself involuntarily pausing before coffin warehouses, and bringing up the rear of every funeral I meet; and especially whenever my hypos get such an upper hand of me, that it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people's hats off- then, I account it high time to get to sea as soon as I can. This is my substitute for pistol and ball. With a philosophical flourish Cato throws himself upon his sword; I quietly take to the ship. There is nothing surprising in this. If they but knew it, almost all men in their degree, some time or other, cherish very nearly the same feelings towards the ocean with me.

--- Herman Melville...or perhaps it was written by patek5107

[springbar]

Originally Posted by patek5107

It is an excellent article and deserves time here.

It's something you found on the internet and passed off as your own.

[Mockingbird]

Wow, you really should stop copy/pasting articles without citing them, and trying to pass them off as your own work. I don't think that ANYBODY on this forum really wants to see another post from you. (other than you comedians, but I can understand that he's like a walking joke)

Please can you clarify the false info/two different accounts/snootiness that went in your other threads? Really, I thought that was enough, but now you go and plagiarize too... Oh brother.

[Numismatist]

dnftt