Once again, I realized that Submariner is #1 Sports Watch

[cbahn]

I have once wrote a post contemplating that rolex price may have gone far and catching up with other high-end brands with superior case finishing and movement cosmetics.

However, upon wearing new rolex submariner ceramic, my thought has been proven wrong once again.

Surely, rolex won't be able to catch up to high-end brands like PP or VC in terms of finishing and complications, yet in the field of simple time-only (or an option of date complication) sports watch, I believe that rolex submariner serves its purpose accompanied with its brand name value and history better than any other sports watches made by PP (Nautilus 5711) or AP (15300/15202)

AP's cal 2121 for jumbo is essentially an ultra-thin movement and thus inherently weak to shocks and stress. AP's cal 3120 might stand a better chance but I heard it had issues with its minute hand shifting when crown is pushed back. Also, despite the fact that I admire its beautiful 22 karat gold rotor, I feel that it is not time-proven enough to match the reliability of 3135 movement.

I apologize for the rambling, but am I the only person who believes that rolex makes the best non-complicated sports watch?

[boogiebot]

the 3135 is a work horse.

[kilyung]

ETA movements are just as robust... slightly smaller mainsprings but well proven design. Between the two, I'd have to give the edge to ETA.

[MP5]

really?

[kkwn98]

Originally Posted by cbahn

I have once wrote a post contemplating that rolex price may have gone far and catching up with other high-end brands with superior case finishing and movement cosmetics.

However, upon wearing new rolex submariner ceramic, my thought has been proven wrong once again.

Surely, rolex won't be able to catch up to high-end brands like PP or VC in terms of finishing and complications, yet in the field of simple time-only (or an option of date complication) sports watch, I believe that rolex submariner serves its purpose accompanied with its brand name value and history better than any other sports watches made by PP (Nautilus 5711) or AP (15300/15202)

AP's cal 2121 for jumbo is essentially an ultra-thin movement and thus inherently weak to shocks and stress. AP's cal 3120 might stand a better chance but I heard it had issues with its minute hand shifting when crown is pushed back.

I'll let you in on a secret - this happens to Rolex movements too. Who'd a thunk it?!

Also, despite the fact that I admire its beautiful 22 karat gold rotor, I feel that it is not time-proven enough to match the reliability of 3135 movement.

Really?

[nim]

daytona and submariner date - always the king of sports watch

[kilyung]

Originally Posted by MP5

really?

Compare the Rolex 3135 to the ETA 2892-2. Neither of these movements would win any beauty pageants. If accuracy is your only criteria, then it doesn’t matter which one you choose as there's no difference between them. Both are capable of exemplary accuracy in all six positions, and do so with a minimum loss of amplitude. More importantly, they both provide excellent accuracy and reliability under real world conditions.

No movement is perfect and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. However the ETA 2892-2 has been around almost half a century. It's proven itself to be an exceptionally accurate, reliable and tough movement. Its main advantage over the 3135 is that it’s a bit thinner, only 3.6mm thick vs 6mm, and its major weakness is a shorter power reserve and less efficient winding system. While the 2892-2 has a shorter mainspring and thus less PR, it's slightly thicker thus making it stronger.

The 3135 is the younger movement and probably has the best automatic winding system today. The oscillating weight is riveted to a steel post on which it pivots. The small circumference of the post, Rolex’s reversing wheels and gearing ratios, greatly improves its winding efficiency. Unfortunately the post's small diameter doesn’t give sufficient support to the weight to stop it from hitting against the movement plates every time the watch is subjected to sudden vertical bumps. Rolex should upgrade to ball bearing races like they’ve done with the 4130. Even better, use lubrication free zirconium oxide ball bearings for the improved strength and efficiency over steel ones. But if it isn't "broken" why fix it right?

There are some other technical differences but ultimately the ubiquity and economy of the ETA 2892-2 give it the edge in long-term survivability. This in no way diminishes the exceptional robustness or accuracy of the 3135. I just wouldn't call it king of the hill.

[DARK_KNIGHT]

Originally Posted by kilyung

Compare the Rolex 3135 to the ETA 2892-2. Neither of these movements would win any beauty pageants. If accuracy is your only criteria, then it doesn’t matter which one you choose as there's no difference between them. Both are capable of exemplary accuracy in all six positions, and do so with a minimum loss of amplitude. More importantly, they both provide excellent accuracy and reliability under real world conditions.

No movement is perfect and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. However the ETA 2892-2 has been around almost half a century. It's proven itself to be an exceptionally accurate, reliable and tough movement. Its main advantage over the 3135 is that it’s a bit thinner, only 3.6mm thick vs 6mm, and its major weakness is a shorter power reserve and less efficient winding system. While the 2892-2 has a shorter mainspring and thus less PR, it's slightly thicker thus making it stronger.

The 3135 is the younger movement and probably has the best automatic winding system today. The oscillating weight is riveted to a steel post on which it pivots. The small circumference of the post, Rolex’s reversing wheels and gearing ratios, greatly improves its winding efficiency. Unfortunately the post's small diameter doesn’t give sufficient support to the weight to stop it from hitting against the movement plates every time the watch is subjected to sudden vertical bumps. Rolex should upgrade to a weight pivoting on ball bearing races like they’ve done with the 4130. It would be even better if they used lubrication free zirconium oxide ball bearings for the improved strength and efficiency over steel ones. But if it isn't "broken" why fix it right?

There are some other technical difference but ultimately the ubiquity and economy of the ETA 2892-2 give it the edge in long-term survivability. This in no way diminishes the exceptional robustness or accuracy of the 3135. I just wouldn't call it king of the hill.

Great info !!!! Thanks !!!!