ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

WWC · 5 November 2013, 04:49 PM

When I first bought my submariner about half a year ago, I noticed how long the clasp was, say compared to the GMT-IIC, Explorer and Daytona.

Well, it's been 6 months into it and whenever I have my sub on my wrist and turn it over to look at the crown, I feel like the clasp size is just perfect. I actually like how the large clasp is able to cover about 80% of the bottom of my wrist and I feel it looks really classy without showing its links.

This is just a personal view and is not intended in insulting anyone who owns either of the above watches, which I think are gorgeous.

Does anybody share my point of view on how perfect the size of the clasp is? When I look at the Exp II 216570, I feel the clasp is actually quite small.

kilyung · 5 November 2013, 05:22 PM

It's all relative but I do like the easy glide clasp. Wish I could find an 18k YG one.

mikkolopez · 5 November 2013, 05:33 PM

Yup, at first I thought the clasp was a bit long on the SubC and would definitely be a scratch magnet but 2 months down to wearing the SubC, I do believe the long clasp is just right for my 6.5 inch wrist and I just have 1 tiny hairline scratch so far. So it's all good.

No experience yet on the 42mm Expy and new GMT2c so I can't comment on their clasp.

Cru Jones · 5 November 2013, 07:16 PM

yup, the clasp is a winner. and, for me, the little nicks and scratches it easily picks up add to my enjoyment of the watch.

travisb · 5 November 2013, 07:37 PM

I prefer the bigger clasp as well.
I wish it was on all models in the pro line.

Bangel · 5 November 2013, 07:55 PM

I'm not bothered by the scratches on my Glidelock clasp, but I actually think the overall look would be better if the clasp was shorter and more of the bracelet was exposed.

I know this would reduce the functionality of the clasp, but I don't need the full range of adjustment it currently offers.

(Yes, I wear a Submariner but I don't dive....

)

gpfps · 6 November 2013, 12:43 AM

I like the old clasp better it looks and feels part of the bracelet. the clasp on the DS is one half of the band. To big and bulky for me.

nikhsub1 · 6 November 2013, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpfps

I like the old clasp better it looks and feels part of the bracelet. the clasp on the DS is one half of the band. To big and bulky for me.

If you ever feel the need to trade for the old clasp, just let me know

mattcantwin · 6 November 2013, 11:58 AM

Hadn't given the size much thought; too impressed with how well it works.

Cc1966 · 6 November 2013, 12:47 AM

Love the features of the newer clasp, wish it could have been engineered tad shorter though.

TimingIsEverything · 6 November 2013, 12:56 AM

I like it a lot, the precision manufacturing and engineering of it is fantastic!

FTX I · 6 November 2013, 01:17 AM

Best bracelet-clasp ever made IMHO.

Psmith · 6 November 2013, 10:13 AM

Glidelock aficionado here

It's a pity that Rolex don't offer it as an option for all the sporty models

Imkman · 6 November 2013, 01:46 PM

I agree !

mruhland31 · 6 November 2013, 02:08 PM

Couldn't agree more. I love every single thing about my Sub C. EVERYTHING!!!

mtb · 6 November 2013, 03:19 PM

somehow the glidelock is slightly more scratch resistant...

samsmart · 6 November 2013, 04:28 PM

I love the Glidelock!

5 November 2013, 04:49 PM	#1
WWC "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Home Posts: 1,438	my thoughts on my sub-c clasp When I first bought my submariner about half a year ago, I noticed how long the clasp was, say compared to the GMT-IIC, Explorer and Daytona. Well, it's been 6 months into it and whenever I have my sub on my wrist and turn it over to look at the crown, I feel like the clasp size is just perfect. I actually like how the large clasp is able to cover about 80% of the bottom of my wrist and I feel it looks really classy without showing its links. This is just a personal view and is not intended in insulting anyone who owns either of the above watches, which I think are gorgeous. Does anybody share my point of view on how perfect the size of the clasp is? When I look at the Exp II 216570, I feel the clasp is actually quite small.

6 November 2013, 12:47 AM	#10
Cc1966 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Real Name: Christopher Location: Georgia, USA Watch: ing the Sea... Posts: 6,713	Love the features of the newer clasp, wish it could have been engineered tad shorter though. __________________ "I wish to have no Connection with any Ship that does not Sail fast for I intend to go in harm's way." Captain John Paul Jones, 16 November 1778 "*Curmudgeons* " Favorites: 1665 SD, Sub Date, DSSD, Exp II, Sub LV, GMTIIc

6 November 2013, 10:13 AM	#13
Psmith "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Real Name: Clive Location: Exoplanet Watch: spring-driven Posts: 38,856	Glidelock aficionado here It's a pity that Rolex don't offer it as an option for all the sporty models __________________

5 November 2013, 05:22 PM	#2
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	It's all relative but I do like the easy glide clasp. Wish I could find an 18k YG one.

5 November 2013, 05:33 PM	#3
mikkolopez "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Philippines Posts: 2,301	Yup, at first I thought the clasp was a bit long on the SubC and would definitely be a scratch magnet but 2 months down to wearing the SubC, I do believe the long clasp is just right for my 6.5 inch wrist and I just have 1 tiny hairline scratch so far. So it's all good. No experience yet on the 42mm Expy and new GMT2c so I can't comment on their clasp.

5 November 2013, 07:16 PM	#4
Cru Jones 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Paris, France Posts: 35,261	yup, the clasp is a winner. and, for me, the little nicks and scratches it easily picks up add to my enjoyment of the watch.

5 November 2013, 07:37 PM	#5
travisb 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Travis Location: FL / NYC Watch: Yes.. Posts: 33,430	I prefer the bigger clasp as well. I wish it was on all models in the pro line.

5 November 2013, 07:55 PM	#6
Bangel "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Australia Watch: 116610LN Posts: 15,802	I'm not bothered by the scratches on my Glidelock clasp, but I actually think the overall look would be better if the clasp was shorter and more of the bracelet was exposed. I know this would reduce the functionality of the clasp, but I don't need the full range of adjustment it currently offers. (Yes, I wear a Submariner but I don't dive.... )

6 November 2013, 12:43 AM	#7
gpfps Banned Join Date: Aug 2008 Real Name: George Location: Detroit Michigan Watch: 18078 Posts: 1,142	I like the old clasp better it looks and feels part of the bracelet. the clasp on the DS is one half of the band. To big and bulky for me.

6 November 2013, 11:58 AM	#9
mattcantwin "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: NY Posts: 453	Hadn't given the size much thought; too impressed with how well it works.

6 November 2013, 12:56 AM	#11
TimingIsEverything Banned Join Date: Feb 2012 Real Name: WatchULookinAt Location: US Posts: 564	I like it a lot, the precision manufacturing and engineering of it is fantastic!

6 November 2013, 01:17 AM	#12
FTX I "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Real Name: Flavio Location: N/A Posts: 14,654	Best bracelet-clasp ever made IMHO.

6 November 2013, 01:46 PM	#14
Imkman "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Canada Posts: 82	I agree !

6 November 2013, 02:08 PM	#15
mruhland31 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Santa Clarita CA Posts: 1,028	Couldn't agree more. I love every single thing about my Sub C. EVERYTHING!!!

6 November 2013, 03:19 PM	#16
mtb "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2013 Location: Singapore Watch: Sky/Sea/Land Posts: 681	somehow the glidelock is slightly more scratch resistant...

6 November 2013, 04:28 PM	#17
samsmart "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Real Name: sam Location: Dallas, TX Watch: Me Tint Posts: 3,777	I love the Glidelock!

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