The 6 digits are more tool watches than 5 digits.

[abozz]

There is a accepted criterion in the forum that the 5 digit watches are tool and the 6 digits are more jewelry and I want to express why I do not agree:

1) The bracelet of 6 digits are solid, rudgged, more strong than 5 digits, then can be more abused how a tool.
2) The cerachom bezel can stand more abused for scratches and fade for sun or hits. Can be broken? Not so easy, is more commun a fade or scratched aluminium.
3) More antimagnetic and shock protection properties, and better lubricants for fight hot and cool enviroments.
4) Glidelock for changes of size because of differents enviroments and temperatures.
5) Maxi case more ruddged, crown guards more bigger, maxi dial more visibility in ocean, caves, montain, etc.
6) I am pretty sure than a 6 digits is more strong evolution in each component of early versions.
7) If you take a vintage bracelet vs a modern, the first one is a empty tuna case, the modern are a more strong tool.

I do not think that Rolex has lost its way, every time Rolex make a better tool, I trust a thousand times more in an SD43 for example or a Deep Sea than in a 1680 or 1665, which were excellent but there is no comparison.
The only reason that modern Rolex seems to be more jewlery is that the ceramic bezel is very brightn than aluminium, we agree on that.

What is your opinion?

[watchwatcher]

IMO, it's more of a feeling when you strap it on than anything else. I have watches that feel very "tool-ish" to me and watches that feel more like jewelry.

While I understand your point on ceramic bezels, you could make the argument that even though the aluminum bezel may scratch or fade, it still is cheaper and easier to fix or replace than its ceramic counterpart.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by watchwatcher

IMO, it's more of a feeling when you strap it on than anything else. I have watches that feel very "tool-ish" to me and watches that feel more like jewelry.

While I understand your point on ceramic bezels, you could make the argument that even though the aluminum bezel may scratch or fade, it still is cheaper and easier to fix or replace than its ceramic counterpart.

Pretty much sums things up for me as well

[subtona]

My 5 digit served me daily for 20 years without removal it never failed during use.

Any updates since then will never be realized by me and quite frankly I don’t know many people who have worn their watch as hard.

So yes the new 6 digit references May be more over built but they are also significantly more expensive.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by abozz

There is a accepted criterion in the forum that the 5 digit watches are tool and the 6 digits are more jewelry and I want to express why I do not agree:

1) The bracelet of 6 digits are solid, rudgged, more strong than 5 digits, then can be more abused how a tool.
2) The cerachom bezel can stand more abused for scratches and fade for sun or hits. Can be broken? Not so easy, is more commun a fade or scratched aluminium.
3) More antimagnetic and shock protection properties, and better lubricants for fight hot and cool enviroments.
4) Glidelock for changes of size because of differents enviroments and temperatures.
5) Maxi case more ruddged, crown guards more bigger, maxi dial more visibility in ocean, caves, montain, etc.
6) I am pretty sure than a 6 digits is more strong evolution in each component of early versions.
7) If you take a vintage bracelet vs a modern, the first one is a empty tuna case, the modern are a more strong tool.

I do not think that Rolex has lost its way, every time Rolex make a better tool, I trust a thousand times more in an SD43 for example or a Deep Sea than in a 1680 or 1665, which were excellent but there is no comparison.
The only reason that modern Rolex seems to be more jewlery is that the ceramic bezel is very brightn than aluminium, we agree on that.

What is your opinion?

My opinion its doubtful if any Rolex is used as a tool watch today most are so pampered they could make them from glass.And no matter the bracelet if not kept clean they will all wear.My 5 series 16600 has done well over 600 hours underwater and had a very hard life compared with today's mainly pampered Rolex watches.Now almost 20 years old and never skipped a beat a true classic Rolex.Not a fan of ceramic inserts or the different case,yes some say the newer clasp is a improvement,but cannot see anything wrong with the old clasp it sure has stood the test of time and quite a bit of abuse on my part as a working tool.As for inserts had one replacement cost just £35 and even then was not badly scratches or shown any fading.

[s.m.b.]

Originally Posted by padi56

My opinion its doubtful if any Rolex is used as a tool watch today most are so pampered they could make them from glass.And no matter the bracelet if not kept clean they will all wear.My 5 series 16600 has done well over 600 hours underwater and had a very hard life compared with today's mainly pampered Rolex watches.Now almost 20 years old and never skipped a beat a true classic Rolex.Not a fan of ceramic inserts or the different case,yes some say the newer clasp is a improvement,but cannot see anything wrong with the old clasp it sure has stood the test of time and quite a bit of abuse on my part as a working tool.As for inserts had one replacement cost just £35 and even then was not badly scratches or shown any fading.

Plenty are used as tool watches...

You honestly believe there isn't a pilot out there wearing a six digit GMT as a daily, or a diver donning a six digit Submariner in and out of the water? This forum can give the best of us a distorted vision as to what's happening in the real world.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Plenty are used as tool watches...

You honestly believe there isn't a pilot out there wearing a six digit GMT as a daily, or a diver donning a six digit Submariner in and out of the water? This forum can give the best of us a distorted vision as to what's happening in the real world.

I guarantee there are a lot of pilots using a GMT or a Breitling but they sure aren’t using them as a tool. It’s more of a nostalgia thing.

I swear some of you guys think the officials at a NASCAR race are using a Daytona as the official clock.

I’m sure there are divers that wear Rolex when diving but I guarantee you that’s not what they are using as their official timer for how much oxygen they have. Once again they’re doing it for nostalgic reasons. Plus it’s cool.

The whole “tool watch” thing sailed long ago. But then you know that.

[abozz]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I guarantee there are a lot of pilots using a GMT or a Breitling but they sure aren’t using them as a tool. It’s more of a nostalgia thing.

I swear some of you guys think the officials at a NASCAR race are using a Daytona as the official clock.

I’m sure there are divers that wear Rolex when diving but I guarantee you that’s not what they are using as their official timer for how much oxygen they have. Once again they’re doing it for nostalgic reasons. Plus it’s cool.

The whole “tool watch” thing sailed long ago. But then you know that.

My point is: The 6 digits are a better tool (for his nostalgic porpouse intended) than the 5 digits? In my opinion Yes! If you travel to the past and give to Cousteau a SD43 he will be very more pleasent because is a better tool that his 6200, is not a piece of jeawlery.

Enviado desde mi SM-G965F mediante Tapatalk

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by abozz

My point is: The 6 digits are a better tool (for his nostalgic porpouse intended) than the 5 digits? In my opinion Yes! If you travel to the past and give to Cousteau a SD43 he will be very more pleasent because is a better tool that his 6200, is not a piece of jeawlery.

Enviado desde mi SM-G965F mediante Tapatalk

I own both and I think there are more rugged. Elsa think they are jewelry. :-)

If it makes you feel better they are jewelry you can be rough with.

[s.m.b.]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I guarantee there are a lot of pilots using a GMT or a Breitling but they sure aren’t using them as a tool. It’s more of a nostalgia thing.

I swear some of you guys think the officials at a NASCAR race are using a Daytona as the official clock.

I’m sure there are divers that wear Rolex when diving but I guarantee you that’s not what they are using as their official timer for how much oxygen they have. Once again they’re doing it for nostalgic reasons. Plus it’s cool.

The whole “tool watch” thing sailed long ago. But then you know that.

Yep, some of us are just so silly.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Yep, some of us are just so silly.

Nostalgia is not silly. I think it’s very cool. But then so is realism.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Yep, some of us are just so silly.

Let me do a better job explaining this. My neighbor owns a model T Ford. He rebuilt it and loves that thing. He drives around the neighborhood and takes it to the Dairy Queen now and then. It doesn’t drive it from Tampa to Boston and back to visit his parents.

[abozz]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I guarantee there are a lot of pilots using a GMT or a Breitling but they sure aren’t using them as a tool. It’s more of a nostalgia thing.

I swear some of you guys think the officials at a NASCAR race are using a Daytona as the official clock.

I’m sure there are divers that wear Rolex when diving but I guarantee you that’s not what they are using as their official timer for how much oxygen they have. Once again they’re doing it for nostalgic reasons. Plus it’s cool.

The whole “tool watch” thing sailed long ago. But then you know that.

When Mr. Saunders and Mr. L’Herpiniere set off on their 1,800-mile Scott Expedition, they pulled about 440 pounds of food, fuel and other essentials. “We cut the handles off our toothbrushes, the labels off our clothes. Everything had to be super lightweight,” Mr. Saunders said.
That also was true for the timepieces they carried. The British watch brand Bremont created the limited-edition Terra Nova, an ultralight titanium wristwatch, to accompany Mr. Saunders and Mr. L’Herpiniere.
Another requirement was that its movement be mechanical. “The polar regions are so extreme — particularly the temperatures — that a lot of electronic gadgets can be unreliable, certainly things with LCD screens,” Mr. Saunders said. “On very cold days, we had problems with GPS units. A mechanical timepiece is the ultimate when it comes to reliability.”
Quoted from: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/06/f...ploration.html

Enviado desde mi SM-G965F mediante Tapatalk

[sillo]

Originally Posted by abozz

“We cut the handles off our toothbrushes, the labels off our clothes. Everything had to be super lightweight,”

And this is why the 6 digit bracelet being heavier doesn't make it better.

[chris242]

i think its so funny how people want these “tool” watches, but then have a hissy fit when scratches appear!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by chris242

i think its so funny how people want these “tool” watches, but then have a hissy fit when scratches appear!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed

[erhein]

Originally Posted by chris242

i think its so funny how people want these “tool” watches, but then have a hissy fit when scratches appear!

If a hammer cost $10,000.00, how many people would actually hit a nail with it?

[vipergts]

Originally Posted by erhein

If a hammer cost $10,000.00, how many people would actually hit a nail with it?

exactly. they went from tool watches to jewelry when the prices went from fairly reasonable to out of this world. I also see people point out how much they worn theirs or how much they abused it. What does that really prove? 20 years from now people will be saying the same thing about their 6 digit when Rolex come out with something newer and shinier.

[abozz]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

I think you’re quoting the wrong person, as I was quoting another member who originally posted the vintage watch. I wear my 114060 in pretty much every environment, and it really thrives in the water.

sorry.

Originally Posted by vipergts

exactly. they went from tool watches to jewelry when the prices went from fairly reasonable to out of this world. I also see people point out how much they worn theirs or how much they abused it. What does that really prove? 20 years from now people will be saying the same thing about their 6 digit when Rolex come out with something newer and shinier.

That's the same as saying that the 5 and 4 digits stopped being tool watches because now they cost even more than the 6 digits, for collection reasons. They are tools, now more expensive than before, but the SD43 or SubC is a better tool than the previous ones in my opinion.

[Carondelet]

Originally Posted by erhein

If a hammer cost $10,000.00, how many people would actually hit a nail with it?

I just used the clasp the other day to drive a couple flat-head screws into a cabinet. Tool watch indeed!

[MinMay]

Originally Posted by chris242

i think its so funny how people want these “tool” watches, but then have a hissy fit when scratches appear!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s usually folks using their life saving on the watch and they’re afraid of losing money. It’s all good... their money their life their choice.

[sager]

Originally Posted by chris242

i think its so funny how people want these “tool” watches, but then have a hissy fit when scratches appear!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So true

[Brew]

That thread with the two subs cracked me up. They're all but identical, yet one is a "tool," the other "jewelry." Which is which? Flip a coin.

[sechsgang]

The new watches are most definitely a bit more robust, however...this one's been going since 78 (not sub but...) with plenty of wear to show for it...and still keeps unreal time...so both have their merits!

[s.m.b.]

Originally Posted by sechsgang

The new watches are most definitely a bit more robust, however...this one's been going since 78 (not sub but...) with plenty of wear to show for it...and still keeps unreal time...so both have their merits!

Well, today, would you prefer to dive with that watch or a six digit? I am not firmly positioned in the four, five, or six digit camp, but I would be reluctant to expose a vintage watch to regular ocean activity.

Perhaps there aren't too many new or vintage Rolexes being used as tools today.

I purchased my 114060 with ocean activity in mind. In the water, I have never once asked myself, "I wonder if my watch looks too much like jewelry. Should I sell it and buy a 14060? And if I do that, should I get a two-liner or a four-liner? I wonder if there are any sharks in the area? Focus, man... You're always drifting... Thick lugs or tapered lugs? Ceramic bezel or aluminum bezel? It's just so hard to decide!"

[sechsgang]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Well, today, would you prefer to dive with that watch or a six digit? I am not firmly positioned in the four, five, or six digit camp, but I would be reluctant to expose a vintage watch to regular ocean activity.

Perhaps there aren't too many new or vintage Rolexes being used as tools today.

I purchased my 114060 with ocean activity in mind. In the water, I have never once asked myself, "I wonder if my watch looks too much like jewelry. Should I sell it and buy a 14060? And if I do that, should I get a two-liner or a four-liner? I wonder if there are any sharks in the area? Focus, man... You're always drifting... Thick lugs or tapered lugs? Ceramic bezel or aluminum bezel? It's just so hard to decide!"

For diving specifically, if in the higher end market...I wouldn't be going Rolex at all likely, more like a TI PLO PROF haha...granted for me, I'm a land only guy so this works great

[abozz]

Originally Posted by s.m.b.

Well, today, would you prefer to dive with that watch or a six digit? I am not firmly positioned in the four, five, or six digit camp, but I would be reluctant to expose a vintage watch to regular ocean activity.

Perhaps there aren't too many new or vintage Rolexes being used as tools today.

I purchased my 114060 with ocean activity in mind. In the water, I have never once asked myself, "I wonder if my watch looks too much like jewelry. Should I sell it and buy a 14060? And if I do that, should I get a two-liner or a four-liner? I wonder if there are any sharks in the area? Focus, man... You're always drifting... Thick lugs or tapered lugs? Ceramic bezel or aluminum bezel? It's just so hard to decide!"

Do you think the 114060 is a tool diver watch and can stand the same time that the BEAUTIFUL vintage do you post? or now is a jewlery?

[s.m.b.]

Originally Posted by abozz

Do you think the 114060 is a tool diver watch and can stand the same time that the BEAUTIFUL vintage do you post? or now is a jewlery?

I think you’re quoting the wrong person, as I was quoting another member who originally posted the vintage watch. I wear my 114060 in pretty much every environment, and it really thrives in the water.

[Spoonage]

They both are rugged and can stand the test of time... I have a Tudor Sub that's still ticking away, and I've worn both my BLNR and SubC while still in the military...

[sillo]

Not that I agree or disagree with the OPs statement, but simply because something is heavier does not mean it's more durable or better.