How is the cyclops affixed to the crystal?

[snapback]

I’ve been curious about this for a while. How is the cyclops affixed to the sapphire (or acrylic) crystal? You’d think that most methods would show some sort of residue or remnant of the process but it really looks like it’s a single piece of crystal. How is it done?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[SearChart]

It is glued.

[Swiss Mad!]

Haha...shortest thread ever!

Originally Posted by SearChart

It is glued.

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

[toxicavenger]

uv glue

[snapback]

Originally Posted by SearChart

It is glued.

Interesting! Do you know what kind of glue? Thanks for the quick response.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[sco]

I've known that it is UV glued on for a while, I'm just surprised that we don't see many of these coming off in the forum... Must be strong stuff!

[Nelson6]

Originally Posted by sco

I've known that it is UV glued on for a while, I'm just surprised that we don't see many of these coming off in the forum... Must be strong stuff!

It's important to remember that Rolex has their own chemistry division, where they formulate all kinds of proprietary lubricants, oils, lumes and adhesives. The glue that attaches the cyclops is pretty amazing stuff-I've never heard of one falling off due to age. The ability for the new Sea-Dweller 43 to have a cyclops is no doubt the latest form of this adhesive that Rolex is finally convinced will stay in place at extreme pressure. Of course, there was the issue of the thickness of the crystal making the focusing of the cyclops difficult without excessive size, but they apparently figured that out, too.

[Blackdog]

Originally Posted by Nelson6

It's important to remember that Rolex has their own chemistry division, where they formulate all kinds of proprietary lubricants, oils, lumes and adhesives. The glue that attaches the cyclops is pretty amazing stuff-I've never heard of one falling off due to age. The ability for the new Sea-Dweller 43 to have a cyclops is no doubt the latest form of this adhesive that Rolex is finally convinced will stay in place at extreme pressure. Of course, there was the issue of the thickness of the crystal making the focusing of the cyclops difficult without excessive size, but they apparently figured that out, too.

True. But let's not forget the biggest division they have. The one that occupies the biggest building: The Heated Nitrox21 Gas Production Facility !!

[Blackdog]

By the way, the cyclops on acrylic crystals is integral. Simply part of the molding process.

[Swiss Mad!]

Originally Posted by Blackdog

By the way, the cyclops on acrylic crystals is integral. Simply part of the molding process.

How come Rolex always used the excuse they couldn't get the Cyclops to stick at extreme depths as an excuse for never having one on the Sea-Dweller range prior to the introduction of the 50th Anniversary model in 2017?

Surely the early Sea-Dwellers had acrylic crystals which would make that argument redundant if the Cyclops was moulded?

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

[Blackdog]

Originally Posted by Swiss Mad!

How come Rolex always used the excuse they couldn't get the Cyclops to stick at extreme depths as an excuse for never having one on the Sea-Dweller range prior to the introduction of the 50th Anniversary model in 2017?

Surely the early Sea-Dwellers had acrylic crystals which would make that argument redundant if the Cyclops was moulded?

On acrylic crystals the magnifier is moulded. This is simple fact.
On sapphire crystals is a separate piece that's glued on with UV glue. Another fact.

The efficiency of the glue has nothing to do with pressure. That Rolex has used always the same excuse does not necessarily make it true.

I have my theory on the subject. The crystal on the 1665 had to be rather thick and very domed. Helps with pressure. Distributes the loads towards the seals and it flexes less.
The cyclops would have probably distorted a lot, and add some unnecessary internal tensions to the plastic area around it. Since it was not really necessary, and the goal was achieving 60bar WR confidently, it was omitted.

After the switch to sapphire, it was simply kept off the Sea Dweller just to keep it visually different to the Sub. It's always been a SD identity mark.

According to my theory, adding the cyclops to the SD43 does not involve any technical breakthrough. It's just a matter of gluing it in place.

But this is just my theory. What do I know...

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Nelson6

It's important to remember that Rolex has their own chemistry division, where they formulate all kinds of proprietary lubricants, oils, lumes and adhesives. The glue that attaches the cyclops is pretty amazing stuff-I've never heard of one falling off due to age. The ability for the new Sea-Dweller 43 to have a cyclops is no doubt the latest form of this adhesive that Rolex is finally convinced will stay in place at extreme pressure. Of course, there was the issue of the thickness of the crystal making the focusing of the cyclops difficult without excessive size, but they apparently figured that out, too.

I doubt Rolex inventd UV glue. It works just like super glue, but dries with UV light so you have time to move the cyclops around. You can easily buy it online and use it yourself. My THC cyclops has takena few knocks over the years but remains firmly attached.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=375949

[Nelson6]

[QUOTE=Old Expat Beast;8725240]I doubt Rolex inventd UV glue. It works just like super glue, but dries with UV light so you have time to move the cyclops around. You can easily buy it online and use it yourself. My THC cyclops has takena few knocks over the years but remains firmly attached. =QUOTE]


I didn't say they invented UV glue. I said they develop their own proprietary chemicals and use them. If you can prove they buy the stuff they use on the cyclops off the shelf, be my guest. Otherwise, I think it's safe to assume they have their own blend. How much time has your THC spent underwater, and at what depth?