✨ The OFFICIAL ✨ 42mm RLX Titanium Yacht-Master Thread

[BNA/LION]

Look at this craftsmanship! Rolex designed a Beautiful Titanium Yachmaster! A precision timepeice, designed to stand the tests of time and be different enough to make it desirable for my collection.

[ZOOK]

Originally Posted by BNA/LION

Look at this craftsmanship! Rolex designed a Beautiful Titanium Yachmaster! A precision timepeice, designed to stand the tests of time and be different enough to make it desirable for my collection.

Power of suggestion....

Steve's offering one in the latest activity....

[lee fowler]

Originally Posted by mike morris

im wating 40mm

Will not happen bud.

[1William]

Originally Posted by ZOOK

Power of suggestion....

Steve's offering one in the latest activity....

I am in.

[BNA/LION]

Lumes glow really good!

[Ravenburg]

Sure is.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Are you aware that MANY brands are using titanium grade 5 with polished parts ?
TAG Heuer, Breitling, etc

Brands use grade 5 when they want to have a titanium watch with polished parts as titanium grade 2 is extremely hard to polish.

I’m quite sure that if you take a magnifying lens and compare the quality of the polished parts between GS and Rolex, Rolex will have the best finish as they have this special variety of grade 5 with their patented process.

Nice try…Quite sure you are not giving grand seiko enough credit

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

RLX Titanium = Grade 5 titanium = 6Al4V = 90% pure titanium with 6%Aluminium and 4% Vanadium.

This is a very high aerospace grade used for the fan blades in jet engines.

6AL4V is stronger than Grade 2 Titanium which is 3AL2.5V and pure titanium.

So RLX titanium is actually 6% Aluminium so maybe its got some recycled Coke and Pepsi cans in the case...

I don’t believe it’s completely accurate to say 6/4 is stronger than 3/2.5.

They have different characteristics and strengths for different applications.
Which is better, depends on their use.


Yield vs shear vs tensile

[Nyl]

Originally Posted by subtona

Nice try…Quite sure you are not giving grand seiko enough credit

Yeah, as I said, it’s possible, I never had a GS.
But I would be really interested in having a detailed surface analysis instead of basing the debate on reputation.
But this is something we’ll certainly never see…


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Yeah, as I said, it’s possible, I never had a GS.
But I would be really interested in having a detailed surface analysis instead of basing the debate on reputation.
But this is something we’ll certainly never see…


Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

Swiss watch industry didn’t like the results for accuracy in their previous face off w GS so yes, it’s likely the Swiss wouldn’t want to participate in finishing comparison either.

[Nyl]

Originally Posted by subtona

Swiss watch industry didn’t like the results for accuracy in their previous face off w GS so yes, it’s likely the Swiss wouldn’t want to participate in finishing comparison either.

What are you referring to ?
Because I'm literally working in the Swiss Watch Industry and I've never heard of this kind of face off :')

Except if you're talking about the quartz crisis but accuracy wasn't the only advantage over mechanical movements.
Of course, quartz and quartz-based technologies will be more accurate than a fully mechanical movement. Their price is also much lower.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Nyl

What are you referring to ?
Because I'm literally working in the Swiss Watch Industry and I've never heard of this kind of face off :')

Except if you're talking about the quartz crisis but accuracy wasn't the only advantage over mechanical movements.
Of course, quartz and quartz-based technologies will be more accurate than a fully mechanical movement. Their price is also much lower.

I assume he's talking about this, when Omega put up a quartz movement against a Seiko mechanical movement because that was they only way they could beat them in competition.

Seiko at Astronomical Observatory Chronometer competitions - or - How the Swiss lost their honor

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by BNA/LION

Lumes glow really good!

Gotta be the most legible Rolex reference by a country mile

[Nyl]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I assume he's talking about this, when Omega put up a quartz movement against a Seiko mechanical movement because that was they only way they could beat them in competition.

Seiko at Astronomical Observatory Chronometer competitions - or - How the Swiss lost their honor

Oh, didn't know about this story, thanks.
Ridiculous move from the swiss watch industry in 1968 for that. But nowadays, in terms of accuracy of mechanical movements, Rolex, Omega and Tudor (Master Chronometer) are better than their equivalent at GS.

But for the quartz and quartz-based technology, the Japanese have always been better than the Swiss.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Oh, didn't know about this story, thanks.
Ridiculous move from the swiss watch industry in 1968 for that. But nowadays, in terms of accuracy of mechanical movements, Rolex, Omega and Tudor (Master Chronometer) are better than their equivalent at GS.

But for the quartz and quartz-based technology, the Japanese have always been better than the Swiss.

Grand Seiko and King Seiko both folded in the mid 1970s - victims of the quartz revolution that took off in Japan perhaps more than anywhere. With them went Seiko's best mechanical movements for a couple of decades till Grand Seiko's return.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I assume he's talking about this, when Omega put up a quartz movement against a Seiko mechanical movement because that was they only way they could beat them in competition.

Seiko at Astronomical Observatory Chronometer competitions - or - How the Swiss lost their honor

Yes. Thank you Adam.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Oh, didn't know about this story, thanks.
Ridiculous move from the swiss watch industry in 1968 for that. But nowadays, in terms of accuracy of mechanical movements, Rolex, Omega and Tudor (Master Chronometer) are better than their equivalent at GS.

But for the quartz and quartz-based technology, the Japanese have always been better than the Swiss.

Based on what?

[subtona]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Gotta be the most legible Rolex reference by a country mile

Hour markers have little to do with legibility regarding telling the time, sure they increase legibility of the dial markers themselves but without the hands the dial is just a static picture.

It’s all about the hands.


Consider the movado museum watch

[Nyl]

Originally Posted by subtona

Based on what?

Based on specifications.
Rolex is -2/+2 seconds per day in the watch head.
Omega Master Chronometer and Tudor Master Chronometer are -0/+5 seconds per day in the watch head.
Omega with Spirate system is even -0/+2 seconds per day in the watch head.

Whereas all GS I've checked on their website is:
-3/+5 seconds per day in static position
-1/+8 seconds per day in "normal use" or even -1/+10 seconds per day
The best one I found in "normal use" is their tourbillon which is -1/+5 seconds per day (which is still worse than the Master Chronometer certification)

Also, Rolex and Omega/Tudor Master Chronometer are resistant to magnetic field, where GS aren't.

Again, I'm only comparing mechanical movements, not quartz or quartz-based movements.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by subtona

Hour markers have little to do with legibility regarding telling the time, sure they increase legibility of the dial markers themselves but without the hands the dial is just a static picture.

It’s all about the hands.


Consider the movado museum watch

The operative word in my post was “Rolex” but I get your point

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Based on specifications.
Rolex is -2/+2 seconds per day in the watch head.
Omega Master Chronometer and Tudor Master Chronometer are -0/+5 seconds per day in the watch head.
Omega with Spirate system is even -0/+2 seconds per day in the watch head.

Whereas all GS I've checked on their website is:
-3/+5 seconds per day in static position
-1/+8 seconds per day in "normal use" or even -1/+10 seconds per day
The best one I found in "normal use" is their tourbillon which is -1/+5 seconds per day (which is still worse than the Master Chronometer certification)

Also, Rolex and Omega/Tudor Master Chronometer are resistant to magnetic field, where GS aren't.

Again, I'm only comparing mechanical movements, not quartz or quartz-based movements.

Good stuff. For the record quartz is never a consideration in my thoughts.

Originally Posted by brandrea

The operative word in my post was “Rolex” but I get your point

Of course. I sometimes wonder if the rolex design team is convinced that larger markers help tell the time? I understand their reluctance to shift from the style of hands they have used for decades but they could stand for an upsize.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by subtona

Good stuff. For the record quartz is never a consideration in my thoughts.



Of course. I sometimes wonder if the rolex design team is convinced that larger markers help tell the time? I understand their reluctance to shift from the style of hands they have used for decades but they could stand for an upsize.

I agree

I tend to think they really suit this reference. The 5 digit Subs had it just about perfect IMHO. Functional and subdued.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nyl]

Originally Posted by subtona

Good stuff. For the record quartz is never a consideration in my thoughts.



Of course. I sometimes wonder if the rolex design team is convinced that larger markers help tell the time? I understand their reluctance to shift from the style of hands they have used for decades but they could stand for an upsize.

Haha, I thought you were maybe thinking about the Spring Drive system
TBH, this system is very impressive and I'll certainly possess one in the future (but not now; I just bought my 1st Rolex yesterday (incoming post to come) and I need to refill my bank account )

[JasoninDenver]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Haha, I thought you were maybe thinking about the Spring Drive system
TBH, this system is very impressive and I'll certainly possess one in the future (but not now; I just bought my 1st Rolex yesterday (incoming post to come) and I need to refill my bank account )

Can’t wait to see what you have incoming.

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by subtona

Hour markers have little to do with legibility regarding telling the time, sure they increase legibility of the dial markers themselves but without the hands the dial is just a static picture.

It’s all about the hands.


Consider the movado museum watch

This watch is more readable (or as readable) than that Yachtmaster?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

I have a question that I don’t think I’ve heard answered …

Does anyone know if refinishing is an issue with this Titanium reference?

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Haha, I thought you were maybe thinking about the Spring Drive system
TBH, this system is very impressive and I'll certainly possess one in the future (but not now; I just bought my 1st Rolex yesterday (incoming post to come) and I need to refill my bank account )

Congratulations on the new purchase.

Originally Posted by bluestreak

This watch is more readable (or as readable) than that Yachtmaster?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not suggesting it is more or less legible. Ie luminescence or large hands vs small.

The movado demonstrates that the time can be known with only a single marker at 12.

[Krash]

Originally Posted by Nyl

Based on specifications.
Rolex is -2/+2 seconds per day in the watch head.
Omega Master Chronometer and Tudor Master Chronometer are -0/+5 seconds per day in the watch head.
Omega with Spirate system is even -0/+2 seconds per day in the watch head.

Whereas all GS I've checked on their website is:
-3/+5 seconds per day in static position
-1/+8 seconds per day in "normal use" or even -1/+10 seconds per day
The best one I found in "normal use" is their tourbillon which is -1/+5 seconds per day (which is still worse than the Master Chronometer certification)

Also, Rolex and Omega/Tudor Master Chronometer are resistant to magnetic field, where GS aren't.

Again, I'm only comparing mechanical movements, not quartz or quartz-based movements.

FWIW, my Rolex Submariner 114060 is more accurate than my Omega Seamaster with the 8800 co-axial movement.

It’s not that the Omega isn’t accurate. It’s very accurate. It’s just that it’s not as accurate as my Submariner.

You’re drawing conclusions based on the specifications you see listed on the internet.

I’m basing it on first hand, real world experience. I wear both of these watches on a regular basis.

YMMV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BNA/LION]

I wish Rolex would offer a Titanium Glidelock Deployant Buckle for the M226627 42mm Titanium Yacht-Master!

I would love to have the option of putting this watch on a on an Oysterflex rubber strap.

[Nyl]

Originally Posted by Krash

FWIW, my Rolex Submariner 114060 is more accurate than my Omega Seamaster with the 8800 co-axial movement.

It’s not that the Omega isn’t accurate. It’s very accurate. It’s just that it’s not as accurate as my Submariner.

You’re drawing conclusions based on the specifications you see listed on the internet.

I’m basing it on first hand, real world experience. I wear both of these watches on a regular basis.

YMMV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow, you literally agree with me with your example but you say I'm drawing false conclusions...

Those are not just "specifications from the internet". Rolex is communicating on this -2/+2 seconds per day in the watch head.
For the Master Chronometer watches (both from Omega and Tudor), they HAVE to be -0/+5 seconds per day to obtain this certification.

And for the special Omega with the Spirate system, it's not just the co-axial system, it's their brand new SPIRATE system that is, at the moment, only on 1 speedmaster model, the speedmaster super racing, reference 329.30.44.51.01.003

So, those are not just things I've read on the internet.

But still, those are the extreme values. You could perfectly have your GS that is at +0 seconds per day and your Rolex or Omega with Spirate system at +2 seconds per day. So your GS would be more precise than your Rolex or Omega. But, overall, Rolex will be more precise than Omega (except for the one with Spirate system) and these 2 brands will be more accurate than GS.