Introduction to Rolex forum...

[grizzlymambo]

Hi everyone,

I wanted to post this because of a post I made in another thread, and I realized it is important for me to establish a social presence here and a lot of people don't know me, and it would take a really long time to post everything in many different threads until people felt comfortable, so I will try to shortcut the process and then iterate from here.

I have been in the watch internet community since 1997, with a strong and well-known presence on TimeZone.com. I was an active trader, and my main shpiel was criticizing Rolex for their awful bracelets (hollow, nasty clasps). My motivation was that I knew Rolex was reading TimeZone.com and if I made a big enough stink consistently, I believed that because I was well known that I could make them change. So of course I was delighted when they did indeed bring out solid braclets and made the awesome glidelock. Mission accomplished as far as I was concerned.

That period was between 1997 and about 2005. During that time, I still liked what Rolex represented so I "caved", and bought a Seadweller (and then sold), and Explorer 2 white then traded for an Explorer 2 black. My feelings about the bracelet and other things were correct, and I couldn't live with the failings.

From the early naughties (I can't remember when), TimeZone sold their soul to Antiquorum and Antiquorum went full tyrant mode on the forum and no-one could criticize anything any more. Brands were allowed to be mediocre and gradually people got so fed up and left to other forums. It took me a few years, but eventually I stopped contributing altogether for about 10 years from about 2005 to 2015. Since 2015, I only really contribute now and again, but everyone is so split up now, I just don't have any reputation anywhere, so I'm just another nerdy kid in their basement as far as anyone is concerned.

However, my interest in watches has returned now that my kids are more grown up, and Tudor has really stepped up in what they're offering. Rolex to me is now something entirely different: a luxury commodity. I am okay with that because I have 2 of them (2010 Sub, 2022 Explorer I) and it's not a bad thing to have things that are valuable to other people. However the fun of watches is a little lost to me when it comes to Rolex, but Tudor has stepped up and become that enjoyable brand. A big reason why I love Tudor is because of my great respect for Rolex and what they have done - in particular, staying independent and having the biggest service network in the world. I am confident that no matter where I am in the world, my Rolex/Tudor can be serviced, unlike say, a JLC.

To me, mechanical watches are redundant/obsolute and purely aesthetic objects. They romanticize the passing of time, and are not for the measurement of time or for any true practical purpose. When I want to go out for some activity, I like to pick up a watch that helps me enjoy that activity more. As such, I gravitate in particular to watches without a date. For someone who has many watches, having a date is a nuisance and runs counter to the idea of picking up a watch to help enjoy the moment more - the date makes the moment feel less whimsical. Plus, I really really dislike the fact that the date cutout ruins the dial. Part of the reason why I am really loving Tudor so much is because so many of their great watches don't have a date - they feel to me as objects for enjoying the moment.

Also, I stand by my argument that no-one needs a date on a mechanical watch. The astronauts didn't need it on their Speedmaster, the world doesn't need it on the Daytona, and I don't need it even though my job requires me to keep track of schedules with team-members in different timezones. Cellphones and laptops are the practical devices for that, mechanical watches are there because they are enjoyable.

As for watch criticisms, my main bear right now is the coaxial escapement. It is a highly flawed invention that trades long-term accuracy for wear and tear on the escape teeth. When coaxials are serviced, the entire escapement is replaced because Omega can't figure out how to prevent the teeth from wearing out even after a short 5 years. A lever escapement by comparison can be over 40 years old without any visible wear and tear on the escape teeth. It is really too bad, because Omega deserves that second place in my heart next to Rolex, but instead that second place is solidly Tudor because of that stupid and unnecessary coaxial. Still, I wonder, how great Omega could be if they only just used a lever escapement - think about it, they could have longer power reserves, better accuracy, better longevity - there are no downsides and lots of upsides, it's so stupid to me how they insist on making everything coaxial just so they can put that text on the dial.

What irks me the most about the coaxial though, is that every time I bring it up, Omega fan boys and watch influencers will just shrug their shoulders. No-one seems to care that the stupid escapement has to be replaced every 5 years like a battery. To be fair, I've heard that it's the same with Rolex 32xx movements and their mainspring barrel (though I don't know how long it takes before that needs to be replaced).

Anyway, that's all from me for now.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by grizzlymambo

What irks me the most about the coaxial though, is that every time I bring it up, Omega fan boys and watch influencers will just shrug their shoulders. No-one seems to care that the stupid escapement has to be replaced every 5 years like a battery.

Welcome to the forum and that is not even close to being true.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by grizzlymambo

I realized it is important for me to establish a social presence here

it would take a really long time to post everything in many different threads until people felt comfortable

I just don't have any reputation anywhere, so I'm just another nerdy kid in their basement as far as anyone is concerned.

Welcome to the forum and congrats on the oddest intro post I've read in a while. Can you clarify what you are prepping us for? You're talking about the importance of a presence and making us comfortable with you and reputation... are you planning some kind of product launch or something? I don't really get any of that. Besides, we're all kind of nerdy kids in somebody's basement. Isn't that what the internet is?

[grizzlymambo]

Originally Posted by beshannon

Welcome to the forum and that is not even close to being true.

I didn't make that up. I chatted at length with an authorized Omega watchmaker, and that exactly what they said. From their perspective, it's a non-issue as they get revenue from replacing the escapement, but they personally would not buy a acoaxial Omega.

Until someone else has taken closeup shots of an Omega coaxial escape teeth showing no wear and tear, I maintain my position.

Feel free to google this. The pictures of the EXTENSIVE wear and tear on the coaxial escape teeth are quite easy to find. I'm also curious to why you say that's not true? Do you have macro pictures of a 5 year old coaxial escape teeth that proves otherwise?

[brandrea]

Welcome to the forum.

Maybe Omega will listen to you too

[grizzlymambo]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Welcome to the forum and congrats on the oddest intro post I've read in a while. Can you clarify what you are prepping us for? You're talking about the importance of a presence and making us comfortable with you and reputation... are you planning some kind of product launch or something? I don't really get any of that. Besides, we're all kind of nerdy kids in somebody's basement. Isn't that what the internet is?

Like I explained, if I had posted regularly and consistently, all of what I said would have come out in many different posts. But since I haven't been doing that, I thought I'd just release my general thoughts accumulated over the last 10 years of not posting, in a single post. Maybe that's why I don't post so much any more, because I prefer to post to a general audience rather than a specific brand audience that just doesn't care for this sort of thing.

[grizzlymambo]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Welcome to the forum.

Maybe Omega will listen to you too

Nah. Rolex's bracelets were not a problem when they were first introduced, they just refused for a long time to evolve. I had huge arguments with people who kept defending the rattly bracelets, but then it was crickets when the new bracelets and clasps were released - why didn't these same people complain about the new bracelet and argue that it was a mistake that Rolex changed them?

On the other hand, Omega felt they needed the coaxial in order to differentiate themself from everyone else. They went all-in on coaxial. The internet has also changed when it comes to influence. Arguing on TimeZone is not enough, you have to be a youtube influencer with 100k+ followers to make a difference.

No-one has every disproven the claims I made, that originated from a watchmaker who actually showed the flaws. People just don't care because the performance of the watch doesn't seem to show this flaw. The accuracy doesn't seem to be affected.

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by grizzlymambo

Maybe that's why I don't post so much any more, because I prefer to post to a general audience rather than a specific brand audience that just doesn't care for this sort of thing.

Ok, but you are in the "Rolex discussion" subforum of the "Rolex Forums". So I'm not sure if this is the most targeted place for your Omega musings.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by grizzlymambo

Nah. Rolex's bracelets were not a problem when they were first introduced, they just refused for a long time to evolve. I had huge arguments with people who kept defending the rattly bracelets, but then it was crickets when the new bracelets and clasps were released - why didn't these same people complain about the new bracelet and argue that it was a mistake that Rolex changed them?



On the other hand, Omega felt they needed the coaxial in order to differentiate themself from everyone else. They went all-in on coaxial. The internet has also changed when it comes to influence. Arguing on TimeZone is not enough, you have to be a youtube influencer with 100k+ followers to make a difference.



No-one has every disproven the claims I made, that originated from a watchmaker who actually showed the flaws. People just don't care because the performance of the watch doesn't seem to show this flaw. The accuracy doesn't seem to be affected.

All good friend.

I personally think the older Bracelets were more suitable to the watches of that time.

I always found them to be a tad more comfortable than the modern day counterparts. Are the modern day versions better made? Sure I can concede that ... but it doesn't make them objectively better IMHO, and I never had an issue with them

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[grizzlymambo]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

Ok, but you are in the "Rolex discussion" subforum of the "Rolex Forums". So I'm not sure if this is the most targeted place for your Omega musings.

sure, but then what do I have to say about Rolex? I don't have a lot. I really like their watches, and I might have a problem with my Explorer I down the road. That's about it.

I have a lot to say about Swatch group (Longines etc.) garbage cotter pin bracelets, a lot to say about coaxial, a lot to say about magnetism - these are all problems that Rolex and Tudors don't have. I guess I could rave about how great Tudors/Rolex make me feel, but I don't find that very interesting.

I will say that I am probably the first person in Calgary get a Pelagos 39 - really loving it. Feel free to ask questions about that if you have any.

[Seddyspaghetti]

Welcome

[bluestreak]

Cool story, bro…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dawalsh]

I too was a member on TZ in early 2000. I didn’t post a lot on there just because I just started learning English back then. I was so excited and happy to find a watch forum. It’s so different back then.

[joli160]

Welcome grizzly

[1665fan]

Box and papers!!!

[breitlingaddict]

Welcome

[JoeJoeBobo]

Is this some kind of manifesto?

[sski]

welcome to the forum!

[eespi003]

Welcome to the forum.

[Cambo]

Wow
Welcome to the forum

[Chiboy]

Welcome! Are you saying that you believe your agitating on TimeZone prompted Rolex to change their bracelet designs?

[Calatrava r]

https://www.signaturewatches.com/blo...ial-escapement


Welcome to the forum. This article and many others seem to believe the current Omega technology is excellent having resolved the issues you mention.

[ROlesorusLEX]

Originally Posted by grizzlymambo

Nah. Rolex's bracelets were not a problem when they were first introduced, they just refused for a long time to evolve. I had huge arguments with people who kept defending the rattly bracelets, but then it was crickets when the new bracelets and clasps were released - why didn't these same people complain about the new bracelet and argue that it was a mistake that Rolex changed them?



On the other hand, Omega felt they needed the coaxial in order to differentiate themself from everyone else. They went all-in on coaxial. The internet has also changed when it comes to influence. Arguing on TimeZone is not enough, you have to be a youtube influencer with 100k+ followers to make a difference.



No-one has every disproven the claims I made, that originated from a watchmaker who actually showed the flaws. People just don't care because the performance of the watch doesn't seem to show this flaw. The accuracy doesn't seem to be affected.

I'm having a hard time finding worn down Omega co-axial movement pictures. Maybe you can link us to some examples?

As far as 5-digit Rolex bracelets and clasps go? That's just, like, your opinion, man. They've been securing tools on wrists for decades without fuss or drama.

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk

[grizzlymambo]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

https://www.signaturewatches.com/blo...ial-escapement


Welcome to the forum. This article and many others seem to believe the current Omega technology is excellent having resolved the issues you mention.

No, the wear and tear issue is not resolved. Many people asked this watchmaker that I mentioned, and he said it is NOT fixed with the newer movements. The coaxial escapement may have changed and evolved, but the fundamental design aspect that causes the teeth to wear out, is that the sharp edge of the pallet fork jewel drags over the sharp edge of the escape teeth - this has not changed and it is this design that causes the teeth to wear out.

Check out this video from 1 year ago of the CURRENT design:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wC9g...t=512s#t=8m41s
(8m 41s mark) which shows the pallet jewel drag over the teeth in 2 spots.

This is a big deal, because there is nothing wrong with the lever escapement, other than after a few years it needs to be relubed because the timing gets slower. I'd take that any day over worn out teeth. I never owned any watch wishing that I didn't need to relube the movement because it is starting to slow down, but we all laugh at poorly made watches with metal shavings everywhere because it wasn't built properly.

[Cambo]

Originally Posted by ROlesorusLEX

I'm having a hard time finding worn down Omega co-axial movement pictures. Maybe you can link us to some examples?

As far as 5-digit Rolex bracelets and clasps go? That's just, like, your opinion, man. They've been securing tools on wrists for decades without fuss or drama.

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk

[grizzlymambo]

Originally Posted by ROlesorusLEX

I'm having a hard time finding worn down Omega co-axial movement pictures. Maybe you can link us to some examples?

As far as 5-digit Rolex bracelets and clasps go? That's just, like, your opinion, man. They've been securing tools on wrists for decades without fuss or drama.

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk

https://omegaforums.net/threads/to-c...-future.27893/

as for my statements about the 5digit being "my opinion": of course it is. Whose opinion would it be, if not mine?

I mean, the maxi case of the 11s are not for everyone, but they are a preference thing, as opposed to the hollow links being objectively weaker than a solid link. I've had in my hands many vintage Rolexes with stretched bracelets and seen some where the pin cut through the hollow link partially - this memory is enough to make me uncomfortable paying thousands of dollars for a watch with a bracelet that has this flaw. But you won't ever catch me comment about someone's preference for a 12 case vs an 11 case, because it is like you say "their opinion".

[ROlesorusLEX]

Originally Posted by grizzlymambo

https://omegaforums.net/threads/to-c...-future.27893/

as for my statements about the 5digit being "my opinion": of course it is. Whose opinion would it be, if not mine?

I mean, the maxi case of the 11s are not for everyone, but they are a preference thing, as opposed to the hollow links being objectively weaker than a solid link. I've had in my hands many vintage Rolexes with stretched bracelets and seen some where the pin cut through the hollow link partially - this memory is enough to make me uncomfortable paying thousands of dollars for a watch with a bracelet that has this flaw. But you won't ever catch me comment about someone's preference for a 12 case vs an 11 case, because it is like you say "their opinion".

It's just a movie quote, man.

Does the 5-digit form make you uncomfortable, Mr. Lebowski?

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by ROlesorusLEX

It's just a movie quote, man.

Does the 5-digit form make you uncomfortable, Mr. Lebowski?

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk

Any Lebowski content is always appreciated

[TekITGuy]

Welcome.