ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

tomato · 19 October 2012, 01:05 PM

Looks really nice on your wrist! Go for it.

iLLGT2 · 19 October 2012, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

There is a lot of talk about wrist presence. It is not important to me, rather I prefer that people don't notice my watch. I know we all buy watches for our own pleasure, however many ROO's have a tendency to stick out, but this Rubberclad somehow doesn't, if it does it is in the right amount. Most importantly, it makes me smile. What more can you ask for?

Agreed

Congrats

As I've said before, makes my classic black dial per update rc look dated :(

Marrk · 19 October 2012, 03:30 PM

I guess the rubber solves the problem of dings to the bezel, but is there any downside?

kilyung · 19 October 2012, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marrk

I guess the rubber solves the problem of dings to the bezel, but is there any downside?

Yes if the rubber gets torn/cut, it cannot be refinished and the bezel needs to be replaced.

psv · 20 October 2012, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kilyung

Yes if the rubber gets torn/cut, it cannot be refinished and the bezel needs to be replaced.

I believe the bezel is still steel and covered in rubber, so if it gets damaged it certainly has to be exchanged. The logical part in me says that an non-finished piece like a rubberized bezel should be a lot cheaper to replace than a hand-finished metal one, then again, I'm not sure AP agrees with that logic... ;-)

Marrk · 20 October 2012, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kilyung

Yes if the rubber gets torn/cut, it cannot be refinished and the bezel needs to be replaced.

It doesn't look like it would be easy to tear or cut that bezel, so maybe it is more durable than the metal bezels, which (I assume) will scratch and ding.

With regard to the rubber, I was thinking more about discoloration and deformation. Possible problems there?

eric23 · 20 October 2012, 02:24 AM

Congrats!

kilyung · 20 October 2012, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

I believe the bezel is still steel and covered in rubber, so if it gets damaged it certainly has to be exchanged. The logical part in me says that an non-finished piece like a rubberized bezel should be a lot cheaper to replace than a hand-finished metal one, then again, I'm not sure AP agrees with that logic... ;-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marrk

It doesn't look like it would be easy to tear or cut that bezel, so maybe it is more durable than the metal bezels, which (I assume) will scratch and ding.

With regard to the rubber, I was thinking more about discoloration and deformation. Possible problems there?

The RC bezel is more expensive than steel alone. I can vouch that the RGRC bezel is more than a RG bezel.

The rubber is more durable than just steel but not impervious to tears or abrasion. There are no reports of deformation. However there are instances of discoloration when contacted with some chemicals.

TSW · 20 October 2012, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

How would you rate yours, Thomas? You have some nice pieces that competes for wrist time - you much are you wearing the RC? More durable than metal bezel APs?

Well the wrist time it gets is about 40/60 along with my Volcano that makes me smile everytime i put it on

The rubber bezel is very much tougher then the steel one and a steel version RC wont cost a arm and a leg to have replaced when the rubber is damaged or when it gets shiny after a long time wearing it.

TSW · 20 October 2012, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kilyung

The RC bezel is more expensive than steel alone. I can vouch that the RGRC bezel is more than a RG bezel.

The rubber is more durable than just steel but not impervious to tears or abrasion. There are no reports of deformation. However there are instances of discoloration when contacted with some chemicals.

The RGRC bezel is a smaller fortune to have replaced, As it is about 30gr of gold underneath that rubber.

Peppers90 · 20 October 2012, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

My AD just got a Rubberclad in, latest version bien sure with black datewheel, updated numerals etc. My inclination has been to find the right time to pick up a 15202, but this, needless to say, makes for a better daily driver.

Oh well, choices...

choices??? You better get this one now, such a striking combo of the steel and black and fits you perfectly

iLLGT2 · 20 October 2012, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TSW

Well the wrist time it gets is about 40/60 along with my Volcano that makes me smile everytime i put it on

The rubber bezel is very much tougher then the steel one and a steel version RC wont cost a arm and a leg to have replaced when the rubber is damaged or when it gets shiny after a long time wearing it.

Rubber bezel i was quoted 1500 a year ago!!

TSW · 21 October 2012, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iLLGT2

Rubber bezel i was quoted 1500 a year ago!!

Then you don't want to know what a RGRC bezel would cost

psv · 23 October 2012, 05:28 AM

Man, for just a bit more I can get a NIB Jumbo from AD... Tough call but I'm increasingly feeling that Jumbo is the way to go, at least for 2012.

TSW · 23 October 2012, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

Man, for just a bit more I can get a NIB Jumbo from AD... Tough call but I'm increasingly feeling that Jumbo is the way to go, at least for 2012.

either one would be a great choice Patrick, And with your job a 15202 would fit fantastic.
However that RC looks awesome on your wrist too, But might be more suitable for play rather then work

psv · 23 October 2012, 05:38 AM

Hey, I changed my job so I can easily get away with RC work-wise! :-)

TSW · 23 October 2012, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

Hey, I changed my job so I can easily get away with RC work-wise! :-)

Really do tell me more

patrike · 23 October 2012, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TSW

Then you don't want to know what a RGRC bezel would cost

Higher price for the RGRC than SS RC? Thought its the exact same part... A piece of rubber. :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Marrk · 23 October 2012, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TSW

Really do tell me more

That looks like the 1972 original.

I'm again confused. Does "Jumbo" refer to the 1972 RO (which was called, or was considered, "ultra-thin")? What is the reference number of the 1972 original, and what is the reference number of the new model that is supposed to be a tribute to the original (has the same 1972 calibre, I understand, which is really rare in watch tributes)? Lastly, why "Jumbo"?

texex91 · 23 October 2012, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TSW

Really do tell me more

G]

Love that 15202 Thomas

TSW · 24 October 2012, 04:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patrike

Higher price for the RGRC than SS RC? Thought its the exact same part... A piece of rubber. :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except the 30 gr of gold underneath

zenithyue · 24 October 2012, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marrk

That looks like the 1972 original.

I'm again confused. Does "Jumbo" refer to the 1972 RO (which was called, or was considered, "ultra-thin")? What is the reference number of the 1972 original, and what is the reference number of the new model that is supposed to be a tribute to the original (has the same 1972 calibre, I understand, which is really rare in watch tributes)? Lastly, why "Jumbo"?

The first 1972 RO gets the name Jumbo due to its 39mm size (which seems quite large compared to most watches in those years), and the same name is passed to the successors although they don't look 'Jumbo' these days. reference number of the newest model is 15202 as shown in the picture.

Marrk · 24 October 2012, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zenithyue

The first 1972 RO gets the name Jumbo due to its 39mm size (which seems quite large compared to most watches in those years), and the same name is passed to the successors although they don't look 'Jumbo' these days. reference number of the newest model is 15202 as shown in the picture.

Cool.

At the risk of beating this into the ground, can you list the differences between the Jumbo and the 15202? I have heard that the calibre is the same, but that the case size of the 15202 is not the same size as the Jumbo, but bigger. How do the dimensions compare? Diameter and thickness?

Thanks.

Willygallardo · 24 October 2012, 10:39 AM

here's mine such a beauty the new dials..

Might be for sale, if anyone is interested gonna start shopping for a new RGRC

psv · 24 October 2012, 12:37 PM

The 15202 is called the Jumbo, here is a good article http://people.timezone.com/library/extras/201012035459

jmusser3r · 24 October 2012, 01:32 PM

That article looks like a great read, i bookmarked it so i can read it later.

iLLGT2 · 24 October 2012, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willygallardo

here's mine such a beauty the new dials..

Might be for sale, if anyone is interested gonna start shopping for a new RGRC

Cuanto?? ;)

Marrk · 24 October 2012, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psv

The 15202 is called the Jumbo, here is a good article http://people.timezone.com/library/extras/201012035459

I will read this with interest. Thank you.

Submarino · 24 October 2012, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marrk

I will read this with interest. Thank you.

The original Royal Oak from 1972 and referred to as 'Jumbo' is the reference 5402. Check my thread with all the reference numbers on all Royal Oaks ever made. There you'll find the ref. numbers for all the 39mm pieces. The 15202 is also a 39mm watch.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=219911

Cru Jones · 24 October 2012, 10:52 PM

based on pictures alone, it's impossible for me to decide....have to see them in the flesh. both are quite beautiful.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

19 October 2012, 01:05 PM	#31
tomato "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Real Name: Frank Location: Canada Watch: PAM & AP Posts: 368	Looks really nice on your wrist! Go for it.

19 October 2012, 03:30 PM	#33
Marrk "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Real Name: Mark Location: Los Angeles Watch: 5513 Posts: 2,192	I guess the rubber solves the problem of dings to the bezel, but is there any downside?

20 October 2012, 02:24 AM	#37
eric23 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Eric Location: Calgary Posts: 9,595	Congrats!

23 October 2012, 05:28 AM	#44
psv "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: USA & France Posts: 11,077	Man, for just a bit more I can get a NIB Jumbo from AD... Tough call but I'm increasingly feeling that Jumbo is the way to go, at least for 2012.

23 October 2012, 05:38 AM	#46
psv "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: USA & France Posts: 11,077	Hey, I changed my job so I can easily get away with RC work-wise! :-)

24 October 2012, 10:39 AM	#54
Willygallardo "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Real Name: Willy Location: Montreal Watch: AP's - Rolex Posts: 972	here's mine such a beauty the new dials.. Might be for sale, if anyone is interested gonna start shopping for a new RGRC

24 October 2012, 12:37 PM	#55
psv "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: USA & France Posts: 11,077	The 15202 is called the Jumbo, here is a good article http://people.timezone.com/library/extras/201012035459

24 October 2012, 01:32 PM	#56
jmusser3r "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Real Name: Jon Location: Iowa Posts: 288	That article looks like a great read, i bookmarked it so i can read it later.

24 October 2012, 10:52 PM	#60
Cru Jones 2025 TitaniumYM Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: CET Posts: 35,717	based on pictures alone, it's impossible for me to decide....have to see them in the flesh. both are quite beautiful.

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