ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

samsmart · 9 December 2013, 01:58 PM

Every-time I put my Rubber B on the Deep Sea, I wish it had Lug Holes....

Sounds like a country song...

Dr. Robert · 9 December 2013, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by samsmart

Every-time I put my Rubber B on the Deep Sea, I wish it had Lug Holes....

Sounds like a country song...

How bout this one.....,rolex you broke my heart when you took away my lug holes

redsubby · 9 December 2013, 02:42 PM

Don't see the need for lug holes or strap change, not a fan of putting something else on. Rolex sport models were never made for straps or strap changes. This ain't Panerai.

Byrdguy · 9 December 2013, 02:45 PM

No lug holes for me. That's one (of many) the reasons I love my Sub C. There are no visible holes anywhere on the watch. Gives it a very integrated look.
I hated the cheap looking sheet metal clasp on the earlier subs. They held up well, I wore a 16610 and a 16613 for over 25 years.

007Sub · 9 December 2013, 02:48 PM

This is going to make for a heated battle isn't it!
I say, lug holes all the way. Structurally its a way stronger design using shoulder-less spring bars, one gets more bar in the hole thereby decreasing the likelihood of failure. I had a couple of breitlings fail at the spring bar on me before... you can imagine my face as I saw the watch flying through the air.

I think its a damn shame that rolex stopped putting lug holes in their watches... then again, I'm also disappointed they don't bevel the edges anymore... :(

JCW1980 · 9 December 2013, 03:00 PM

Lug Holes!

I like Rolex in general, but I LOVE vintage Rolex sport watches. The lug holes are just one of the details that I like. They add to the tool-ish look and function of those references. I'm sad that the contemporary sport models don't have LH's, but that just makes the vintage ones that much cooler. :)

+1 on the comments about toothpicks and paper clips :thumbup:

Old Expat Beast · 9 December 2013, 04:11 PM

I prefer classic lug holes but still like the look of this one on a nato, especially after its recent trip to the Rolex Spa.

Clay · 9 December 2013, 05:13 PM

Lug Holes speak to a time long gone and to which we will never see again…
A time when it was function over form…
A time when men were men and women were women…
A time when you could get a cup of coffer for a quarter…
A time when I could easily bend over to tie my shoes…

subtona · 10 December 2013, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay

Lug Holes speak to a time long gone and to which we will never see again…
A time when it was function over form…
A time when men were men and women were women…
A time when you could get a cup of coffer for a quarter…
A time when I could easily bend over to tie my shoes…

Armyguy03 · 10 December 2013, 01:03 AM

see sig...

subtona · 10 December 2013, 01:59 AM

lugholes, they're not just for rolex:)

anilzat · 10 December 2013, 02:05 AM

Old curmudgeons like me love holes in our Rolex.

subtona · 10 December 2013, 03:51 AM

for more lughole encouragement click here:

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=327189

MitchSteel · 10 December 2013, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Every-time I put my Rubber B on the Deep Sea, I wish it had Lug Holes....

Sounds like a country song...

How 'bout this....

My Chev won't start, my dog's too old for hunt'n, thank goodness I have Lugholes for strap swapp'n......

CrownMe · 10 December 2013, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdguy

No lug holes for me. That's one (of many) the reasons I love my Sub C. There are no visible holes anywhere on the watch. Gives it a very integrated look.
I hated the cheap looking sheet metal clasp on the earlier subs. They held up well, I wore a 16610 and a 16613 for over 25 years.

Cheap sheet metal???

....If you say so

Dan Pierce · 10 December 2013, 08:52 AM

As a degenerate strap changer I prefer lug holes.
dP

blue lion · 10 December 2013, 10:13 AM

I understand the pros of the lugholes but I prefer the clean look without them so that's the versions of the Rolexes that I bought. To each their own.

samson66 · 10 December 2013, 10:50 AM

I prefer no lug holes. Just a cleaner sleeker look in my opinion. But I certainly can understand that folks that change bracelets a lot would prefer them.

xjeeunitx · 10 December 2013, 02:24 PM

Lug holes on the previous case design... No log holes on the super case.

jolimont · 10 December 2013, 04:54 PM

Name: ImageUploadedByTapatalk1386658443.698376.jpg
Views: 45
Size: 74.6 KB

vitalsignsrn · 10 December 2013, 05:26 PM

Im not a good source of info. I have a DJ (random serial) and a Submariner 14060M which I just acquired pretty much brand new. I don't change my bracelets at all so either or works for me. Good luck works for you too..LOL

9 December 2013, 02:48 PM	#35
007Sub "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Real Name: Greg Location: USA Watch: Milsub Posts: 1,635	This is going to make for a heated battle isn't it! I say, lug holes all the way. Structurally its a way stronger design using shoulder-less spring bars, one gets more bar in the hole thereby decreasing the likelihood of failure. I had a couple of breitlings fail at the spring bar on me before... you can imagine my face as I saw the watch flying through the air. I think its a damn shame that rolex stopped putting lug holes in their watches... then again, I'm also disappointed they don't bevel the edges anymore... :( __________________ @true_patina @true.dome

9 December 2013, 04:11 PM	#37
Old Expat Beast TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Adam Location: Far East Watch: Golden Tuna Posts: 28,893	I prefer classic lug holes but still like the look of this one on a nato, especially after its recent trip to the Rolex Spa. Attached Images __________________ _______________________

10 December 2013, 01:03 AM	#40
Armyguy03 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: DM[V] Watch: 16710 \| 16600 Posts: 3,546	see sig... __________________ Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

10 December 2013, 01:59 AM	#41
subtona 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: gus Location: East Coast Watch: APK & sometimes Y Posts: 26,733	lugholes, they're not just for rolex:) Attached Images __________________

10 December 2013, 03:51 AM	#43
subtona 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: gus Location: East Coast Watch: APK & sometimes Y Posts: 26,733	for more lughole encouragement click here: https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=327189 __________________

9 December 2013, 01:58 PM	#31
samsmart "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Real Name: sam Location: Dallas, TX Watch: Me Tint Posts: 3,777	Every-time I put my Rubber B on the Deep Sea, I wish it had Lug Holes.... Sounds like a country song...

9 December 2013, 02:42 PM	#33
redsubby "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Real Name: Henry Location: TW/SoCal Posts: 1,632	Don't see the need for lug holes or strap change, not a fan of putting something else on. Rolex sport models were never made for straps or strap changes. This ain't Panerai.

9 December 2013, 02:45 PM	#34
Byrdguy "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Florida Panhandle Watch: Sub C LV, Posts: 490	No lug holes for me. That's one (of many) the reasons I love my Sub C. There are no visible holes anywhere on the watch. Gives it a very integrated look. I hated the cheap looking sheet metal clasp on the earlier subs. They held up well, I wore a 16610 and a 16613 for over 25 years.

9 December 2013, 03:00 PM	#36
JCW1980 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: DFW, TX Watch: Speedmaster Posts: 672	Lug Holes! I like Rolex in general, but I LOVE vintage Rolex sport watches. The lug holes are just one of the details that I like. They add to the tool-ish look and function of those references. I'm sad that the contemporary sport models don't have LH's, but that just makes the vintage ones that much cooler. :) +1 on the comments about toothpicks and paper clips :thumbup:

9 December 2013, 05:13 PM	#38
Clay Banned Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Up a tree Posts: 4,001	Lug Holes speak to a time long gone and to which we will never see again… A time when it was function over form… A time when men were men and women were women… A time when you could get a cup of coffer for a quarter… A time when I could easily bend over to tie my shoes…

10 December 2013, 02:05 AM	#42
anilzat Banned Join Date: Sep 2013 Real Name: John Williams Location: Alaska outback Watch: GMT Posts: 1,051	Old curmudgeons like me love holes in our Rolex.

10 December 2013, 08:52 AM	#46
Dan Pierce "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Real Name: D'OH! Location: Kentucky Watch: Rolex-1 Tudor-3 Posts: 36,311	As a degenerate strap changer I prefer lug holes. dP __________________ TRF Member# 1668 Bass Player in TRF "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Band Commander-in-Chief of The Nylon Nation The Crown & Shield Club Honorary Member of P-Club

10 December 2013, 10:13 AM	#47
blue lion "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Florida State! Watch: It's just a watch. Posts: 1,463	I understand the pros of the lugholes but I prefer the clean look without them so that's the versions of the Rolexes that I bought. To each their own.

10 December 2013, 10:50 AM	#48
samson66 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Mike Location: Downy Ocean Hon Watch: my money leaving! Posts: 13,968	I prefer no lug holes. Just a cleaner sleeker look in my opinion. But I certainly can understand that folks that change bracelets a lot would prefer them.

10 December 2013, 02:24 PM	#49
xjeeunitx 2025 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 5,621	Lug holes on the previous case design... No log holes on the super case.

10 December 2013, 04:54 PM	#50
jolimont "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Real Name: Will Location: land of oz Watch: sundial Posts: 2,219

10 December 2013, 05:26 PM	#51
vitalsignsrn "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Judy Location: Ontario Watch: 116234 - 14060M Posts: 4,607	Im not a good source of info. I have a DJ (random serial) and a Submariner 14060M which I just acquired pretty much brand new. I don't change my bracelets at all so either or works for me. Good luck works for you too..LOL

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)