Dealbreakers?!?!

[FloydRedford]

Hey all,

I just got to thinking about my collection and why I chose to buy this or that and why I didn’t buy others. I’ve realized I have a few “dealbreakers” that guide my decision process like:

1. No large numerals on dial, only indices.
2. No PCL’s or full polish bracelet
3. No 4:30 date window
4. No fauxtina, although my mind may change on this

What say you? Any dealbreakers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SLWoodster]

Usually it’s my wallet that breaks up the deals.

[warrior]

Going forward, NO Rolexes that don’t have AR coating on the underside of the crystal.

[FloydRedford]

Originally Posted by warrior

Going forward, NO Rolexes that don’t have AR coating on the underside of the crystal.

Good point. I probably would agree. Main reason I bought the 226570 over the 216570.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Snow-Dweller]

Originally Posted by warrior

Going forward, NO Rolexes that don’t have AR coating on the underside of the crystal.

When did they start?….on which lines?

For me:
legibility is important (white dialled 116520 didn’t last)
I have tired of the cyclops (which partly explains my current fascination with OPs).
I am a great fan of the easy-link, and have retro fitted it to my 5 digit professional pieces.
Finally, my Tudor GMT didn’t last due to the thickness. And whilst on the subject of Tudor…I won’t do snowflakes again…but I’m quite into the idea of a Ranger…

[JRell]

My dealbreakers have changed over the years. Current dealbreaker, needs to have a ceramic bezel.

[warrior]

Started quite a while ago. Across many of the lines. Most Current Subs and GMTs have them now. DJs too. Others can chime in about when Rolex started.

Originally Posted by Snow-Dweller

When did they start?….on which lines? The greatest weakness not talked about in Rolex watches IMO. But it’s being addressed now.

For me:
legibility is important (white dialled 116520 didn’t last)
I have tired of the cyclops (which partly explains my current fascination with OPs).
I am a great fan of the easy-link, and have retro fitted it to my 5 digit professional pieces.
Finally, my Tudor GMT didn’t last due to the thickness. And whilst on the subject of Tudor…I won’t do snowflakes again…but I’m quite into the idea of a Ranger…

[enjoythemusic]

No diag date at 4:30
No Candy Pink color (tho reserve the right to change that decision)
Nothing that'll poke my eye out
Legibility is greatly appreciated (tho may or may not be necessary)

[Harry-57]

Wearing comfort. Other than that, if I like it and can afford it, it's in.

[alphadweller]

Size, anything below 38mm and over 45mm is a no-go on my wrist.

[BIGMAC142]

-I feel like I have to have some sort of quick adjustment on the bracelet to really enjoy a watch. I was on the verge of buying a Day-Date but ultimately eliminated it from my dream watches because of this.

-Numerals on the dial being cut off. A. Lange & Sohne is the absolute worst offenders of this and ruins so many watches that could’ve been perfect.

-Too thick of cases. If they are thick it’s a no.

[median_red]

Prominent solid endlinks like the Sub, hate the feel.

[Jb1264]

Diag date at 4:30 is a huge swerve

I have an aversion to red such as the pip on the BB58 which draws my attention not in a good way

I reserve the right to change my mind if I get a Daytona with its red text

[joli160]

It has to be shiny, as long as it has PCL’s and fluted/ ceramic bezel I like it

[GolfJunkie]

4:30 date window
Roman numerals
Lack of on the fly adjustment
Anything over 42mm in diameter and ~14mm thickness

[THC]

Love the solid Jubilee bracelets now.. all I need

[Krash]

Despite having 7.7” wrists, any watch larger than 42mm is a dealbreaker for me. Any watch less than 38mm is a dealbreaker, too.

I wouldn’t classify Roman numerals as a dealbreaker, but I’m not a fan. Same goes for PCLs.

I know you can swap out the straps in most cases, but as soon as I see a watch on a blue leather strap, I immediately lose interest in it.

In many cases, the date function—no matter where it’s located—is an immediate dealbreaker for me.

Annual or perpetual calendar.

Office GMT vs Travelers GMT: definitely prefer travelers. Office GMT is a dealbreaker for me.

Minute repeater function. I have no interest in having a watch with that function.

Worldtimers. Cool but they’re basically wrong a couple times a year because of how and when some nations change their clock a couple times a year.

Date function on a manually wound watch. That’s a dealbreaker for me.

Square watches. Triangular is fine. Square watches are not.

I’m not a fan of seconds listed instead of minutes. For example, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 instead of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. And this is why the Air King is a watch I’ll never have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Toptwo]

Originally Posted by SLWoodster

Usually it’s my wallet that breaks up the deals.

This! Right here!

[Rolexken]

A black or dark blue coloured face with light coloured/lumed hands to be able to see the time ………

[t65tampa]

I don't like precious metal cases with rubber straps.

[GGGMT]

They’re all good. My dealbreaker is gems. Hate em


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Snow-Dweller]

Originally Posted by Krash

Despite having 7.7” wrists, any watch larger than 42mm is a dealbreaker for me. Any watch less than 38mm is a dealbreaker, too.

I wouldn’t classify Roman numerals as a dealbreaker, but I’m not a fan. Same goes for PCLs.

I know you can swap out the straps in most cases, but as soon as I see a watch on a blue leather strap, I immediately lose interest in it.

In many cases, the date function—no matter where it’s located—is an immediate dealbreaker for me.

Annual or perpetual calendar.

Office GMT vs Travelers GMT: definitely prefer travelers. Office GMT is a dealbreaker for me.

Minute repeater function. I have no interest in having a watch with that function.

Worldtimers. Cool but they’re basically wrong a couple times a year because of how and when some nations change their clock a couple times a year.

Date function on a manually wound watch. That’s a dealbreaker for me.

Square watches. Triangular is fine. Square watches are not.

I’m not a fan of seconds listed instead of minutes. For example, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 instead of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. And this is why the Air King is a watch I’ll never have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great post. I agree with many, if not all, of your comments above

[Snow-Dweller]

This is becoming an interesting thread…..

[InvgrWatches]

Originally Posted by t65tampa

I don't like precious metal cases with rubber straps.

I second that.

[Mr Ben]

I reserve the right to change this as I get older but at the moment:
- yellow gold
- diamonds/ gems
- romans (I don’t know why I feel I’m too young for this)
- square and rectangular watches
- anything designed to be sparkly - the disco ball/ patterned dial land dweller is a good example
I never thought about it as a deal breaker before but I agree with the post on blue leather straps. I wouldn’t buy a leather strap unless it was black or brown.

I suppose this translates as anything that is a bit flashy or eye catching. Just realised I’m boring.

[thegrandseirolexguy]

1) 4:30 date window

2) Crown that is too small and fiddly, or lacks proper grip, or is engulfed by the crown guards, thus making it a chore to unscrew the crown to set the date and time.

3) poor legibility

4) WR so poor that you can’t even wash your hands under running water with it, or get caught in heavy rain with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AF_Rob]

Diamonds and push/pull crowns immediately come to mind. There are more but I’d need to think on it.

I do have push/pull crowns in the collection but won’t add more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Shadow Play]

Has to have a micro adjustment in the bracelet or else easy removable links (Santos style).

[Wilco68]

Dealbreakers for me;-
Reds/blues/greens/brown on bezels.
Less than 40mm case size
No ceramic bezel (vs aluminium)

[jb335]

None. I keep an open mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk