GlideLock opinions--yay or nay???

[ems12]

Yay for me on my DSSD.

Best thing since sliced bread.

[john64]

It's a yay for me also on my 114060.

[subtona]

It's been out for quite a while now, looks like overwhelming approval.

I haven't had one however I had a couple with an easy link and I liked the simple 2 position adjustment of the easy link a lot.
It seems the easy link would be all that is necessary for most non diving needs?

[Ritch99]

Originally Posted by eonflux

Love the Glidelocks on my DSSD and SubC, and use them everyday.
The DSSD version functions better, such as usable when watch is on the wrist and easier to move up/down one increment. And more enjoyable to use. But the DSSD Glidelock is more complicated and hopefully it'll be durable.

I agree 100%, that is why I sourced a DSSD clasp and put it on my Sub C. Now both the sub C and Deep Sea fit perfectly. I have had my Deeep Sea for almost 2 years now, wear it almost everyday. No issues with it at all.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by subtona

It's been out for quite a while now, looks like overwhelming approval.

I haven't had one however I had a couple with an easy link and I liked the simple 2 position adjustment of the easy link a lot.
It seems the easy link would be all that is necessary for most non diving needs?

I have a GMTC, and the Easy Link is really helpful. But it really falls short of the Glidelocks in versatility.

But my case may be a bit unusual in that I wear my watches on my right or left wrist (right larger than left about 1/2 link) depending on my mood, and my wrist size seems to fluctuate throughout the day and night. So the Easy Link was great in providing one increment of adjustability, but the increased number of options with the Glidelocks are much better for me.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by eonflux

I have a GMTC, and the Easy Link is really helpful. But it really falls short of the Glidelocks in versatility.

But my case may be a bit unusual in that I wear my watches on my right or left wrist (right larger than left about 1/2 link) depending on my mood, and my wrist size seems to fluctuate throughout the day and night. So the Easy Link was great in providing one increment of adjustability, but the increased number of options with the Glidelocks are much better for me.

Never considered the ambidextrous wrist

[Headshrinker]

Excellent addition!

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by joejeweler

Would you rather than thin and flimsy rather than "beefy."

That's certainly why I prefer the "tuna can" clasps. Glidelock is a cool idea, but it's bulky enough that I still find the old clasps more comfortable. Which clasp is more reliable is certainly debatable.

It's funny, years ago, Rolex wearers used to defend Rolex's clasp and bracelet decisions, when compared to the more solid bracelets and clasps from the likes of Omega, and, now that Rolex uses heavier bracelets and clasps, Rolex wearers say it's essential.

[Maiden]

Love it, was out golfing in 30c weather yesterday, watch felt a little tight, quick adjustment and felt like new again. It is so nice to know I can always have the perfect fit with this watch at any time!

[rc51matt]

Yay all the way for me. The smooth polished inside that sits on the wrist is very comfy. Not that the older style wasn't but if you twisted your wrist certain ways you could slightly feel the sharp edge on the bottom of your wrist. Nothing that was really uncomfortable but just something small I noticed. Also the watch is way more balanced on the wrist with the solid bracelet & clasp.

[HogwldFLTR]

For me there is enough wiggle room in my bracelet sizing that I don't need it. When I had my subC I used it a few times in a year's time. Having sold it I don't really miss it. That isn't a "No" vote but more of a "how important is it really?" vote. It is a nice clasp and well made. I never noticed its bulk when I owned the watch but rather noticed the bulk of the head itself. So a definite "yes" if it is important to you, otherwise, "meh."

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

For me there is enough wiggle room in my bracelet sizing that I don't need it. When I had my subC I used it a few times in a year's time. Having sold it I don't really miss it. That isn't a "No" vote but more of a "how important is it really?" vote. It is a nice clasp and well made. I never noticed its bulk when I owned the watch but rather noticed the bulk of the head itself. So a definite "yes" if it is important to you, otherwise, "meh."

I agree with this. My wrist isn't subject to major size swings from swelling from the weather etc., so once I find a good fit that pretty much is it. It's sort of like a car seat to me...once set I rarely have to deal with it again.

But if your wrist does change size significantly or you simply have a hard time finding a good initial fit then I can see where it is real handy. I think it would be a good addition to say the GMT (why not?), but leave the clasp the same length and just have a smaller range of adjustments, just enough to fine tune the fit once the correct amount of links are removed.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by subtona

It's been out for quite a while now, looks like overwhelming approval.

I haven't had one however I had a couple with an easy link and I liked the simple 2 position adjustment of the easy link a lot.
It seems the easy link would be all that is necessary for most non diving needs?

Agree, Gus. The only exception in my mind being the YM2. It's so big and heavy I think you just about need the glide lock to dial in that perfect fit.

[RastabanStar]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

I agree with this. My wrist isn't subject to major size swings from swelling from the weather etc., so once I find a good fit that pretty much is it. It's sort of like a car seat to me...once set I rarely have to deal with it again.

But if your wrist does change size significantly or you simply have a hard time finding a good initial fit then I can see where it is real handy. I think it would be a good addition to say the GMT (why not?), but leave the clasp the same length and just have a smaller range of adjustments, just enough to fine tune the fit once the correct amount of links are removed.

If we all measured, I think most of us would probably have similar daily wrist fluctuations. It's our preferred tolerances that are different. I really like my watch to be snug so it doesn't drop down my wrist too much. A small change in wrist size can make a big difference.

Now that I've got the glidelock, it's hard for me to go to other watches without wishing they fit as well as my Sub.

[bigsmall]

I wonder how anyone could bear an older bracelet :-) or even live without glidelock.

President bracelets don't have it?

[hbi]

Originally Posted by Bangel

Same here.

Sometimes it's like wearing a watch head and a clasp with a little bit of bracelet on either side to connect the two. (I exaggerate, but the sentiment still holds true for me).

I do really like it though and think it's a great innovation.

The only "problem" I had with it was when it was relatively new and it wouldn't fold down properly. Turned out it was just a pesky little sticker that I'd missed that had managed to curl itself up and lodge inside the clasp!

My BLNR has the EasyLink, so can't comment on the Glidelock. However, the "pesky little sticker" exemplifies the high precision and close tolerances to which these parts are manufactured (which is part of why we love these machines).

[Eric Chan]

The best change to the Submariner. Love the Glidelock clasp!

[T. Ferguson]

Originally Posted by RastabanStar

If we all measured, I think most of us would probably have similar daily wrist fluctuations. It's our preferred tolerances that are different. I really like my watch to be snug so it doesn't drop down my wrist too much. A small change in wrist size can make a big difference.

Now that I've got the glidelock, it's hard for me to go to other watches without wishing they fit as well as my Sub.

Maybe, but I don't know. There are many people who are just more prone to changes from swelling for one reason or another than others. It's biology and everyone is different. I read post from members that are always needing to adjust their bracelets in or out because of the seasons, humidity, too much salt, or whatever. I simply don't. I wear it snug as well. I have an Easylink on my GMT but I never use it - don't need to. And I'd certainly use it if the fit changed and it would improve it. I'm pretty particular about a good fit.

Like I said previously though, I'd find it useful as a way to dial in the initial fit. It would also come in handy if I gained weight. Other than that, for me it wouldn't get used much. I'd certainly not need the range of adjustment offered by the Sub bracelet and would prefer the Glidelock on a GMT sized clasp. But I realize this defeats the purpose as far as Rolex is concerned because to them it is there in order to expand the bracelet without tools sufficiently to get over a wet suit so it needs a sufficient range of adjustment to accomplish that.

[trackntrail]

Yay on Glidelock for me. Having the ability to make fine adjustments on the fly is awesome. The only downside is the somewhat thick clasp.

[westsiderkg]

Originally Posted by dirt

the dssd has it and i'm quite impressed.

+1

[RastabanStar]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

I'd certainly not need the range of adjustment offered by the Sub bracelet and would prefer the Glidelock on a GMT sized clasp.

I agree that we don't need that much glidelock, although the wide range came in handy when my boss asked if he could try mine on.

[brettpaul]

YAYYYYYY my good man!

[Emerald4194]

Love it - great for small adjustments, and when I extend fully, goes over a thin wetsuit for diving in the tropics

[GhostInTheMachine]

By far adds so much more to the Submariner bracelet, wish they all came that way. I like the larger size too, it balances better on my wrist which makes it more comfortable.

I was just mentioning it to another enthusiast, how much better the Glidelock clasp is.

[Mr DateJust]

I am probably going to be one of the only ones here who says nay. I do not like it at all. The idea is fine but I found the sub c very uncomfortable. Even with the glide lock I could not get a good fit. That was part of why I sold mine. Also the clasp cover is too long for people with smaller wrists. It takes up the whole back of your wrist. I know the perception is the newer "solid" bracelets are vastly superior but I don't think they are as comfortable. The clasps are too long and thick. I find the old style much better, lighter and thinner for all day wear. Just my personal option which I know many won't share.