ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
3 June 2016, 03:22 PM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: AZ
Posts: 584
|
reminds me of halloween, not feelin it. Not as versatile for everyday use in my opinion.
|
3 June 2016, 03:45 PM | #3 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: OC
Posts: 1,466
|
Quote:
halloween, is a good one. It didn't even cross my mind. I am not looking for versatility nor for everyday use. My first look at it looked like a cool sporty watch but I guess most people that own rolex watches don't like the change. |
|
3 June 2016, 03:23 PM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Real Name: Wayne
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,407
|
Nope
|
3 June 2016, 03:25 PM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Watch: Sub
Posts: 862
|
No. Ruined
|
3 June 2016, 03:29 PM | #6 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 41,905
|
What are your thoughts on rolex explorer II pvd?
Well it certainly would turn heads...
...or stomachs... ...or turn the milk sour... Not my taste but like customizing your car's bodywork, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
__________________
Does anyone really know what time it is? |
3 June 2016, 03:31 PM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 168
|
no
|
3 June 2016, 03:34 PM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 19,706
|
Not a fan.
|
3 June 2016, 03:37 PM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,448
|
Not on this forum!
__________________
|
3 June 2016, 03:37 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Real Name: Me
Location: Australia
Watch: Daytona 116500LN
Posts: 676
|
Each to their own, just not for me :)
|
3 June 2016, 03:42 PM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Real Name: Sony
Location: not so far...
Watch: 116610LN & 16610LV
Posts: 122
|
It looks good but
no.. I wont buy it. |
3 June 2016, 03:43 PM | #12 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2016
Real Name: Mike
Location: Las Vegas
Watch: TT DJ 16233
Posts: 1,002
|
Looks different, wouldn't buy one though.
|
3 June 2016, 03:45 PM | #13 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Location: ASK
Watch: SubC.5711.D500
Posts: 2,236
|
Nope. Doesn't click at all.
|
3 June 2016, 05:07 PM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 24
|
I like it but feel it looks like one of the ICE watches so wouldn't be buying one even if I could
|
3 June 2016, 05:20 PM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Chopped Liver
Location: S. Wales Valleys
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 9,926
|
If it was an official Rolex reference, I could be tempted.
__________________
116520 Black, 116610 LVc, 116660 D-Blue, 116610 LNc, 116622 Blue, PAM359, PAM689, PAM737 "Why should you allow an AD to shake you down, just so you can buy a watch" - Grady Philpott Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
|
3 June 2016, 05:51 PM | #16 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: SF Bay Area
Watch: 1655/MkI
Posts: 1,100
|
color scheme is a bit off...the orange is simply too predominant. white or gray might have worked better. judging by that Playboy Submariner, the Bamford design mentality seems to border on the gauche.
|
3 June 2016, 05:53 PM | #17 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NL
Watch: Yachtmaster
Posts: 14,737
|
It does not look that bad imho, I would be concerned that the coating wears off and than it becomes ugly
__________________
Day Date 18238, Yachtmaster 16622, Deepsea 116660, Submariner 116619, SkyD 326935, DJ 178271, DJ 69158, Yachtmaster 169622, GMT 116713LN, GMT 126711. |
3 June 2016, 06:02 PM | #18 |
2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Real Name: Lee
Location: 42.48.45N70.48.48
Watch: Too many to list!
Posts: 33,662
|
Yeah, no.
|
3 June 2016, 06:24 PM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 629
|
Such heavily modded Rolex are generally not popular in this forum. I have to say that I concur with that.
Some subtle mods like a different color datewheel or seconds hand are fine by me, but something that extreme on a Rolex/Tudor is a no go. Besides, following that path you pay a lot and you still lose two very important assets of Rolex watches: the great resale value and the aftersales service. I do like the looks of it, though. But along those lines I'd rather go with something like this (not my pic): It's A LOT less money, and it's its own thing. Original and not a modded something else. Just my 2c. |
3 June 2016, 06:21 PM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: David
Location: australia
Posts: 20,215
|
No go for me
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
watches many |
3 June 2016, 10:08 PM | #21 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 1,262
|
Sorry not for me!!!
|
3 June 2016, 10:35 PM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2016
Real Name: Zak
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Watch: Rolex 114300
Posts: 290
|
I like it, but I wouldn't buy it.
|
3 June 2016, 10:38 PM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: God Bless Texas
Watch: Smurf, DD40, SkyD.
Posts: 1,515
|
Looks like a Luminox
|
3 June 2016, 11:03 PM | #24 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Real Name: Brian
Location: Northern Virginia
Watch: One of Not Many
Posts: 17,892
|
Quote:
Not interested in an altered Rolex.
__________________
IWC Portugieser 7 Day, Omega Seamaster SMP300m, Vacheron Constantin Traditionnelle Complete Calendar, Glashutte PanoInverse, Glashutte SeaQ Panorama Date, Omega Aqua Terra 150, Omega CK 859, Omega Speedmaster 3861 Moonwatch, Breitling Superocean Steelfish, JLC Atmos Transparent Clock |
|
3 June 2016, 11:09 PM | #25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Larry
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Yes
Posts: 34,996
|
No, I wouldn't...would you?
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.