ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

dsio · 11 February 2011, 12:09 AM

Daytona, the size is smaller but not too small, but the big disappointment is how my brother's 5 year old one looks now, they don't survive continuous hard use well at all, badly damaged bezel, PCLs are ruined, bracelet has stretched badly, inner clasp is pitch black, loose when closed and corroded badly, one pusher's sticky, and crystal has chips, for some reason if a Sub or SD looked like that, its character, but on the Daytona, its just a wreck.

Alessi156 · 11 February 2011, 12:16 AM

Explorer 39mm. I loved the pictures and thought it was a must have. However, when I tried it on, I was completely underwhelmed.

Zed Homme · 11 February 2011, 12:39 AM

I bought a 16613 with a blue face as I had always wanted one. Unfortunately it just didn't look right on me (although I still love the watch) so I flipped it for a daytona....

steubi1 · 11 February 2011, 02:28 AM

I thought the new Explorer I looked nice on photos, and with the new 39mm size it seemed very attractive to me....In fact, I decided to buy one.

But then I tried it on at The AD, and what shall I say: Disappointing to me, absolutely disappointing....boring watch, hands too short. I didn't buy one.

On the other hand, when I saw pics of the new SubC, I thought that I will never get one; it didn't look right to me!
And then I saw them in flesh and I loved them, today I have both SS models, green and black.

IMG_0180.jpg

Tom

aboen · 11 February 2011, 02:32 AM

Bought one on one without ever seeing in person, tried to love it but couldn't .

Ebruner · 11 February 2011, 04:40 AM

The new submariner was a huge letdown for me personally.

-Eddie

Danand · 11 February 2011, 12:12 PM

The older sub was disappointing once I saw the Subc. I thought it would be the other way round-in pictures I definitely preferred the older 16610 but on the wrist the subc just sang a lovely tune!

HL65 · 11 February 2011, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mosco

The YMII. On pics it looked hideous... When i saw it in person, I was blown away by how it actually feels. Talking about the WG version, of course - the YG still does not appeal to me at all.

X2!!!!

watchnut.com · 11 February 2011, 01:29 PM

DSSD. I loved the early photos. When I went to a dealer and saw it live for the first time, my reaction was: "Wow, this is the first Rolex hockey puck ever!"

Maybe it will grow on me.

mascot · 11 February 2011, 05:54 PM

I worked my ass of and finally got the cash for a BNIB 16610LV and went to my AD for the first time to buy it.
I tried it on and it feelt so, (sorry) cheap and light

I went without a watch and very dissapointed.....

One month later I bought a PO but it was broken straight from the box and later the movement collapsed

Flipped it and waited 6 months
and recently bought my SUB 116610LN and I just LOVE IT!!

dligg72 · 11 February 2011, 06:22 PM

Date-Just II

OLJR · 11 February 2011, 07:33 PM

Like many others I was not keen on the YMII until I saw one in the wild and then got closer up at the local AD. I think that WG looks much better than YG though.

Will I get one? Well I would not turn it down if someone offered it to me but I do not think it is sufficiently wonderful to save up rather a long time for.

I am not keen on the watches with diamonds and other precious jewels on, but that is true both when I see the watches in photographs and in the flesh!

Otherwise I can honestly say that I have not seen/tried a Rolex that I did not like.

bfleischer · 11 February 2011, 09:17 PM

Fun and interesting responses, keep them coming .

11 February 2011, 12:09 AM	#61
dsio "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Real Name: Ashley Location: Brisbane Watch: Rolex Sub 1680 '79 Posts: 2,301	Daytona, the size is smaller but not too small, but the big disappointment is how my brother's 5 year old one looks now, they don't survive continuous hard use well at all, badly damaged bezel, PCLs are ruined, bracelet has stretched badly, inner clasp is pitch black, loose when closed and corroded badly, one pusher's sticky, and crystal has chips, for some reason if a Sub or SD looked like that, its character, but on the Daytona, its just a wreck. __________________ -- Omega Seamaster Grand-Lux Stepped Pie-Pan 14K Gold OJ2627 '53 -- -- Omega Cal 320 Chronograph 18K Gold OT2872 '58 -- -- Omega Cal 321 Speedmaster Pro 145.012 '67 -- -- Rolex Submariner 1680 "Ghost" '79 -- -- Rolex SS Daytona 116520 '04 --

11 February 2011, 02:32 AM	#65
aboen "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Here and there Posts: 935	Daytona.. Bought one on one without ever seeing in person, tried to love it but couldn't .

11 February 2011, 04:40 AM	#66
Ebruner "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: Eddie Location: Kentucky Watch: 118208 Posts: 2,510	The new submariner was a huge letdown for me personally. -Eddie __________________

11 February 2011, 01:29 PM	#69
watchnut.com 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Mark B Location: Austin, TX Watch: 15400ST Posts: 461	DSSD. I loved the early photos. When I went to a dealer and saw it live for the first time, my reaction was: "Wow, this is the first Rolex hockey puck ever!" Maybe it will grow on me. __________________ -Mark There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. - William Shakespeare Uva Uvam Vivendo Varia Fit

11 February 2011, 05:54 PM	#70
mascot Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: UTC/GMT +1 Hours Watch: 16570 Posts: 250	Never meet your hero I worked my ass of and finally got the cash for a BNIB 16610LV and went to my AD for the first time to buy it. I tried it on and it feelt so, (sorry) cheap and light I went without a watch and very dissapointed..... One month later I bought a PO but it was broken straight from the box and later the movement collapsed Flipped it and waited 6 months and recently bought my SUB 116610LN and I just LOVE IT!!

11 February 2011, 12:16 AM	#62
Alessi156 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Los/Lon Posts: 116	Explorer 39mm. I loved the pictures and thought it was a must have. However, when I tried it on, I was completely underwhelmed.

11 February 2011, 12:39 AM	#63
Zed Homme "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Chris Location: usa Watch: Rolex Posts: 6,962	I bought a 16613 with a blue face as I had always wanted one. Unfortunately it just didn't look right on me (although I still love the watch) so I flipped it for a daytona....

11 February 2011, 02:28 AM	#64
steubi1 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Real Name: Tom Location: Switzerland Watch: too many Posts: 1,150	I thought the new Explorer I looked nice on photos, and with the new 39mm size it seemed very attractive to me....In fact, I decided to buy one. But then I tried it on at The AD, and what shall I say: Disappointing to me, absolutely disappointing....boring watch, hands too short. I didn't buy one. On the other hand, when I saw pics of the new SubC, I thought that I will never get one; it didn't look right to me! And then I saw them in flesh and I loved them, today I have both SS models, green and black. IMG_0180.jpg Tom

11 February 2011, 12:12 PM	#67
Danand "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Real Name: Jonathan Location: Ottawa Watch: 116610LN Posts: 1,246	The older sub was disappointing once I saw the Subc. I thought it would be the other way round-in pictures I definitely preferred the older 16610 but on the wrist the subc just sang a lovely tune!

11 February 2011, 06:22 PM	#71
dligg72 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: california Posts: 138	Date-Just II

11 February 2011, 07:33 PM	#72
OLJR Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: Oliver Location: Qatar Watch: GMT-Master II Posts: 260	Like many others I was not keen on the YMII until I saw one in the wild and then got closer up at the local AD. I think that WG looks much better than YG though. Will I get one? Well I would not turn it down if someone offered it to me but I do not think it is sufficiently wonderful to save up rather a long time for. I am not keen on the watches with diamonds and other precious jewels on, but that is true both when I see the watches in photographs and in the flesh! Otherwise I can honestly say that I have not seen/tried a Rolex that I did not like.

11 February 2011, 09:17 PM	#73
bfleischer "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: NY,NY Watch: My Uncles CYMA Posts: 123	Fun and interesting responses, keep them coming .

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