The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 24 March 2010, 02:07 PM   #1
nodatalog
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Brazil
Posts: 28
Disappointment with the DJ II crown size - Letter to Rolex SA Geneva

Email sent to bruno.meier@rolex.com (Rolex S.A. President - Geneva, Switzerland)

--------

Hi,

I am a average Rolex customer located in Osaka, Japan, and I am writing
you full of disappointment. I was expecting to purchase a new Datejust
41 mm bi-colour here, in an Rolex AD in Osaka, Japan.

To my surprise, the watch crown of the DJ 41 mm is the same as the DJ 36
mm. and it is disproportionately small on such a big watch.

Such small crown breaks the watch balance and goes against the overall
feeling of watch quality; not to mention the crown size makes this model
look somewhat cheap to my eyes--as if Rolex was saving on a new crown.

Joke aside, the DJ II 41 mm can compare to a human body of a good
stature with a winy-tinny masculine attribute (ie. the crown).

The Milgauss 40 mm. has a bigger crown if I am not mistaken. I am not
found of the model, but the watch balance looks good.

The team or person in charge of the crown for the DJ 41 mm. has made a
blatant mistake.

Could you give the datejust II the crown size it deserves at last? I
don't spend 1 millions yens for a half-backed watch (watch size update,
still a small crown of an older 36 mm models).

I have large wrists and I was really glad to welcome a 41 mm. Rolex
watch (not a sports watch as the Daytona or GMT II or even a Scub.)
That's a big miss.

Best regards,

------

So I won't purchase the DJ II for now as expected.
And with a bit of luck, ~25 years later, the new DJ III might eventually have a decent crown size
nodatalog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 02:17 PM   #2
STEELINOX
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
STEELINOX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Real Name: Sink-O!
Location: a praire in AZ
Watch: ROLEX-less atm...
Posts: 14,020
Bfhaaa ha haa haa - oh, you got this right brutha, that crown belongs on "mini me's watch" !

I cant wait to see Bruno's response...
__________________

*Positive Waves Baby*
Lug Hole Loyalist / Chamfer Line Inspector
INFORTHE WIN
SUB-MAH-REEEN-ER ~ !
STEELINOX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 02:21 PM   #3
Zirotti
"TRF" Member
 
Zirotti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Real Name: Jason
Location: Tejas
Watch: Invicta
Posts: 1,066
I disagree. The focal point of the DJII is not the crown...

If you want a big crown, but a Big Pilot.

Zirotti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 02:44 PM   #4
ral
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 650
There is no pleasing everybody... I would have liked it in 38-39mm and with smaller hour markers...

The DJ II looks fine. It just won't please everybody (no watch does).
ral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 02:55 PM   #5
Tools
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
Tools's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,490
I think that the DJ II looks just fine........

Certainly a refreshing look from the huge and over industrialized caged crown offerings of some other brands.... Now, those are badly proportioned.......
__________________
(Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....)
NAWCC Member
Tools is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 04:18 PM   #6
cody p
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Canada
Watch: Air-King 114200
Posts: 2,878
well, you are entitled to your opinion and you are directing it to the right guy. let us know if he responds.
cody p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 05:51 PM   #7
acce1999
"TRF" Member
 
acce1999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: GMT+1
Posts: 2,711
I am looking forward to see the reply from Geneva!

A friendly meant question:

Don't you think that the designers in Geneva have spent a lot of time and consideration before putting the watch into production?

Best,

A
acce1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 06:02 PM   #8
JJ Irani
Fondly Remembered
 
JJ Irani's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Real Name: JJ
Location: Auckland, NZ
Watch: ALL SOLD!!
Posts: 74,319
In my opinion, the TWINLOCK crown is more proportionately sized on the new Milgauss.

JJ
__________________
Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!!

I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!!
JJ Irani is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 06:56 PM   #9
swatty
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
swatty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Peter
Location: Sydney
Watch: The Game
Posts: 17,414
The crown seems OK to me, but obviously some would like it bigger
swatty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 06:59 PM   #10
spuds
"TRF" Member
 
spuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Dan
Location: Essex, UK
Watch: West Ham! COYI!!
Posts: 7,941
I love the DJII's but I've gotta agree with JJ too......



Quote:
Originally Posted by JJ Irani View Post
In my opinion, the TWINLOCK crown is more proportionately sized on the new Milgauss.

JJ
__________________
Onwards & Upwards Rodders...... Onwards & Upwards.

Life is not about how fast you can run or how high you can climb...........
It's about how well you can bounce!!



TRF HALL OF FAME JANUARY 2010
spuds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 07:19 PM   #11
nodatalog
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Brazil
Posts: 28
acce1999: I don't expect an answer, but maybe to correct my grammar and typos...

This "poor" crown choice is not even a topic of polemic. It's a plain regression.

Knowing the product (any Rolex) costs almost nothing at the end of the assembly line (even a gold DJ, a few hundred dollars at most)*, the cost of a bigger crown is not a matter. They could have done better, especially since a larger crown is already available on the Milgauss.

As I see things, Rolex did not (usual for the Swiss) take a real risk with their new big size watch; as they did not define clearly themselves in term of future watch size: the DJ II gives a mixed feeling. That is all benefit for the maker: It could have been better with a bigger crown on the side of the large wrists; it is not that bad with a small crown on the side of the small wrists. In a few years, they will correct it and "alleluia", people will all applause the wise decision. Call that a cheap trick for a major brand.

Well, it does not need to be a watch expert to see something wrong with the DJ II and DD 41 mm. This is just common sense. I just remember now when I was a kid, the glass of my Rolex was in plastic when all the other makers had sapphire glasses. What a joke already.

* The price (edit: the rip-off price) we all agree to pay, is only the value we give the brand as a mark recognition, never the value of the product. No wonder why 70% of the price of a brand watch goes into the pocket of the marketing-mafia (marketing people=high grade cocaine, Krug champagne and imported Russian hookers to hump in private jets and VIP lounges). On the behave of the marketing people, thank you for purchasing Rolex-just kidding, half kidding, no kidding?
nodatalog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 March 2010, 12:06 PM   #12
STEELINOX
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
STEELINOX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Real Name: Sink-O!
Location: a praire in AZ
Watch: ROLEX-less atm...
Posts: 14,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by nodatalog View Post
acce1999: I don't expect an answer, but maybe to correct my grammar and typos...

This "poor" crown choice is not even a topic of polemic. It's a plain regression.

Knowing the product (any Rolex) costs almost nothing at the end of the assembly line (even a gold DJ, a few hundred dollars at most)*, the cost of a bigger crown is not a matter. They could have done better, especially since a larger crown is already available on the Milgauss.

As I see things, Rolex did not (usual for the Swiss) take a real risk with their new big size watch; as they did not define clearly themselves in term of future watch size: the DJ II gives a mixed feeling. That is all benefit for the maker: It could have been better with a bigger crown on the side of the large wrists; it is not that bad with a small crown on the side of the small wrists. In a few years, they will correct it and "alleluia", people will all applause the wise decision. Call that a cheap trick for a major brand.

Well, it does not need to be a watch expert to see something wrong with the DJ II and DD 41 mm. This is just common sense. I just remember now when I was a kid, the glass of my Rolex was in plastic when all the other makers had sapphire glasses. What a joke already.

* The price (edit: the rip-off price) we all agree to pay, is only the value we give the brand as a mark recognition, never the value of the product. No wonder why 70% of the price of a brand watch goes into the pocket of the marketing-mafia (marketing people=high grade cocaine, Krug champagne and imported Russian hookers to hump in private jets and VIP lounges). On the behave of the marketing people, thank you for purchasing Rolex-just kidding, half kidding, no kidding?
Uh, yeah, I think so too. It just plain looks wrong; it culda been a 1.5mm bigger in diameter and presto, almost perfect. The way to perfection according to JJ would be strapping a SuperJubee on it...
__________________

*Positive Waves Baby*
Lug Hole Loyalist / Chamfer Line Inspector
INFORTHE WIN
SUB-MAH-REEEN-ER ~ !
STEELINOX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2010, 07:10 PM   #13
chrislkb
"TRF" Member
 
chrislkb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Christopher
Location: Singapore
Watch: out kiddo!
Posts: 1,033
Does Rolex really care about the feedbacks from us??? I dunno whether they realise that their ar** is being kicked
__________________
Viva La Rolex
chrislkb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 March 2010, 12:13 PM   #14
Zirotti
"TRF" Member
 
Zirotti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Real Name: Jason
Location: Tejas
Watch: Invicta
Posts: 1,066
I am very confused by this thread...
Zirotti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 March 2010, 12:19 PM   #15
STEELINOX
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
STEELINOX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Real Name: Sink-O!
Location: a praire in AZ
Watch: ROLEX-less atm...
Posts: 14,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zirotti View Post
I am very confused by this thread...
Its okay, so am I !
__________________

*Positive Waves Baby*
Lug Hole Loyalist / Chamfer Line Inspector
INFORTHE WIN
SUB-MAH-REEEN-ER ~ !
STEELINOX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 March 2010, 12:42 PM   #16
moviefreak
"TRF" Member
 
moviefreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: in my house...
Posts: 5,524
The answer will be:
mr Nodatalog
ask J.J.. He was the ceo when the size of the crown was selected.
Cheers and
B.M (new tosser in charge)
__________________
Cheers, Eduardo
Be a WIS not a WUSS... and remove all the stickers..
moviefreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 March 2010, 09:59 PM   #17
CPTL
"TRF" Member
 
CPTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Real Name: Kevin
Location: Texas on my mind
Watch: Sub Date; SS/WG DJ
Posts: 2,445
Is the DJII crown not the same twinlock crown available on Exp-IIs, 16710s, Milgauss, and the others??
__________________

16610 Submariner Date; D Serial
16234 DateJust SS with WG Fluted Bezel & Jubillee, White Roman Dial; F Serial
16570 Explorer II White Dial; M Serial

And Hers: 78240 Mid-Size DateJust SS with Domed Bezel & Oyster, White Roman; D Serial
CPTL is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

Asset Appeal

Wrist Aficionado


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.