"Recognizability" of Sports Models in Wild

[peleg49794]

I’m new here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NachoNeal]

YM2 does NOT fly under the radar.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by brandrea

If you read the numerous threads on “is it safe to travel to X” threads, anything with an oyster or jubilee bracelet is instantly recognized as being a Rolex.

Personally, I think the bigger and louder a watch is the more it will be noticed. If you want to fly under the radar, there are better sports models IMO.

Exactly

I am sure that Rolex SA is thrilled to find out their customers do not want the brand to be recognized.

[Kerby]

While no Rolex is completely undercover, I would say the following are more under the radar than others:

1. Explorer 1 or OP in black/white/blue - These all look like a plain generic "watch" from a distance. Easily mistaken for a regular Seiko/Citizen/etc. Only way someone really spots this watch is if they are literally staring at the words "ROLEX" on the dial. Everyone likes to copy the Rolex oyster style bracelet these days.

2. Explorer II - For the majority of the population, this doesn't really fit the perception of a "Rolex". Black or Polar, they have never quite jumped out at me in the wild.

In some cases the "Sub" could be undercover due to the amount of homages out there. Fossil and Seiko make diver inspired watches with the cyclops. A lot of the fashion brands have their own Sub look-a-like.

All said, generally more times than not, people can spot a Submariner from a mile away.

[Kerby]

My answer would be the:

EX1 - Looks like a generic watch from afar. Easily mistaken for a Seiko/Citizen/Hamilton/etc. Need to be up close to see the words "ROLEX" inscribed onto the dial. Not everyone recognizes the iconic Arabic "3,6,9" unless theyare an enthusiast.

EX2 - Both Polar and Black versions are extremely understated with the brushed finishes and lack of a ceramic bezel. For the majority of the general population this is not what they generally expect a Rolex to look like.

[Giovannibravo]

This is an interesting question been debating this with my family. In my opinion, the cyclops, jubilee bracelet and fluted bezel are the most recognizable features of modern Rolex models. I would suggest if you want something under the radar to get an OP, EXP1 or AK.

[huncho]

nothing with PCLs will fly under the radar, but that's what long sleeves are for anyway

[Seddyspaghetti]

Would-be watch robbers would likely rob you for any rolex as they know what they are looking at.

I like to wear my ss daytona to stay under the radar with normal non watch people as it does not scream rolex and doesn’t really have any obvious rolex design language. Also the rolex crown and writing on the dial is sort of covered by the chrono hand. Also it does not have any bright colors that pop.

[3omar]

I agree. A pre-ceramic SS Daytona, especially with a leather strap, is really under-the-radar. Ask me how I know...

[milgauss2232]

YM 2 has got to be the most flashy Rolex around, saved the iced out models.

[karleone]

Any Rolex with an Oyster case is very recognisable. There is no such an under the radar Rolex for watch thieves.

[zengineer]

People may or may not know it is a Rolex but it's a huge mult-color watch...it isn't remotely "under the radar".

Sent from my SM-T830 using Tapatalk

[dlrolex]

Explorer 1
OP black

[Kingranch]

Don't buy one, sounds like you live in fear.

Simple solution.

[the dark knight]

I personally find that despite being very familiar with each Rolex model, out in the wild it's specific design elements that attract my attention first (that could apply to any watch brand), and then my brain registers it as a Rolex. Without those certain design elements, I'm less likely to look at someone's watch in the first place.

PCLs on Oysters/Jubilees, colorful rotating bezels, and cyclops really just draw the human eye, imo. A credit to Rolex's design, but a negative for those that want to be incognito.

For example, some people kind of consider the BLNR on Oyster and the Sub Date pretty much interchangeable in a collection. But in the wild, a BLNR is ridiculously eye catching, much more than a Sub imo. The way light catches the PCLs and the bi-color bezel immediately attracts the human eye.

This is also why I don't really buy that a BLRO on Jubilee is much more noticeable than a BLNR on Oyster. Maybe a tad, but come on. Those two watches get people to stare, and those that know will know immediately.

A Sub otoh is so homaged, imitated, etc that I think it kind of blends in. It's like when I see someone wearing a really nice PM dress watch. From a distance, sure it could be a Calatrava, or maybe it's a Frederique Constant. So I don't really care. I think the Sub has a similar effect, especially if it's the no-date.

Apologies for the long winded answer. But to sum up I'd say the Explorer I by far is the most under the radar as it doesn't have a lot of those eye catching elements. In 36mm guise even more so. I'd say the GMT models are the MOST eye catching and obviously Rolex, more so than Daytonas imo.

A Sub no-date may be a good compromise in between.

[Xpatcan1]

YM2 is still a Rolex and easily noticeable, if you don't want someone to mention your watch in the wild then a YM2 might do it, but just because they don't say anything doesn't mean it hasn't been noticed.

if you want something that's under the radar go with a Patek/VC/JLC dress watch, something in white gold or steel.

[johnorpheus]

Rolex is made to be recognizable. That’s a lot of what you’re paying a premium for. If you want under the radar, go Tudor.

[jaySL350]

Originally Posted by brandrea

If you read the numerous threads on “is it safe to travel to X” threads, anything with an oyster or jubilee bracelet is instantly recognized as being a Rolex.

Personally, I think the bigger and louder a watch is the more it will be noticed. If you want to fly under the radar, there are better sports models IMO.

+1,,,,YM is a lot of watch ,,,,,'

[RiRi]

I'd get an OP 39

[Filipão]

Originally Posted by VegasBaby

Nobody wants a YM II so you’re in good shape!!

Absolutely.

[nachopc]

Don’t wear a Rolex these days to be under the radar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[shockdoctrine]

panerai-sized chunk of white shiny metal, PCL oyster, colossal bright blue bezel, yeah that screams UNDER THE RADAR to me, i'd go for it

[Pw92676]

To fly under the radar, I would not do Rolex. Consider any Laurent Ferrier or VC Fifty-Six

[Hulk_Hunter]

I don’t think any are truly under the radar, but agree that as close as one can get is something with no cyclops, no PCL, and no jubilee. An explorer II definitely, maybe even a black submariner or Explorer I.

[airchitect]

Originally Posted by VegasBaby

Nobody wants a YM II so you’re in good shape!!

Reasonably solid answer there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[csaltphoto]

The thing with Rolex is they have a pretty consistent design aesthetic (Except the Cellini line). So they tend to be distinctive if you know what you are looking for. The YM II is the farthest outside the typical mold but it is still a large and flashy watch.

[subprimero]

Explorer on a leather or NATO strap.

[Santiago32]

Explorer 1 is def most low key. A Rolex AD confused it for a Tudor

[bobernet]

Jocke says, not under the radar.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Filipão]

Originally Posted by bobernet

Jocke says, not under the radar.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

As above, can't get any worse.