ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Watchdog · 13 April 2010, 02:55 PM

I keep trying to love the TT blue sub ceramic, but I can't.

Background--I had always wanted a TT blue sub. In fact, I think this might be the quintessential Rolex watch. So when I read about the ceramic, I had to wait, as I am a big fan of the GMTIIC in all variations.

When I first see the TT blue sub at the AD . . . Well extreme disppointment. I kept returning to take a look at it, but I could never fall in love with it. Even my children thought it looked strange.

So my question is WHY did Rolex change the blue on this? Seriously, WHY? Could they not make the same color in ceramic? I don't know, but I would love to have an answer.

If they could've made it the right color with the enlarged case, it would have been my favorite watch ever! But they didn't. The blue isn't right, and for the first time I'm actually considering a smaller Rolex with the proper blue.

Omega_Precision · 13 April 2010, 03:05 PM

Ceramic is just that...ceramic.

Bezel inserts are aluminum and the blue will give off a hint of a metallic hue.....

PeterT · 13 April 2010, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega_Precision

Ceramic is just that...ceramic.

Bezel inserts are aluminum and the blue will give off a hint of a metallic hue.....

The dial is flat in comparison to the shimmering dial on the 16613. They could have kept this. I believe the dial on the new LV shimmers after looking at the photos on here.
I was excited to see a new TT blue Sub last year but after comparing the 16613 model with the new ceramic I was more than pleased that I had bought the older model.

Peter

Singslinger · 13 April 2010, 06:58 PM

I totally agree - the new blue is nowhere as attractive as the old shade.

gelshocker · 13 April 2010, 07:30 PM

The way I see it, they're different blues, and attractive in their own special way

I like the old 'deeper' blue, but also the new azure blue. Cheers,

HL65 · 13 April 2010, 07:31 PM

If you don't like it--don't force it!

padi56 · 13 April 2010, 08:42 PM

Myself quite dissapointed with the whole new slightly modded old Rolex range.Afraid a slightly new case and a ceramic insert dont excite me at all,but perhaps I will get to like the new clasp in time.But agree not over fond of the new colour blue in TT Sub dial or insert.

Atomant · 13 April 2010, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingkongkelley

I keep trying to love the TT blue sub ceramic, but I can't.

Background--I had always wanted a TT blue sub. In fact, I think this might be the quintessential Rolex watch. So when I read about the ceramic, I had to wait, as I am a big fan of the GMTIIC in all variations.

When I first see the TT blue sub at the AD . . . Well extreme disppointment. I kept returning to take a look at it, but I could never fall in love with it. Even my children thought it looked strange.

So my question is WHY did Rolex change the blue on this? Seriously, WHY? Could they not make the same color in ceramic? I don't know, but I would love to have an answer.

If they could've made it the right color with the enlarged case, it would have been my favorite watch ever! But they didn't. The blue isn't right, and for the first time I'm actually considering a smaller Rolex with the proper blue.

Hey buddy, I just purchased a TT black sub today and I saw the TT blue ceramic sub and it really isn't that bad. But my favourite is still the TT Black Sub.

gqllc · 13 April 2010, 09:15 PM

I could not warm up to it either so I recently bought the "older dial" blue TT sub...a M series !

jets · 13 April 2010, 10:01 PM

The black TT sub is a crazy beautiful watch. The blue is ugly though like you said.

Doug507 · 13 April 2010, 10:04 PM

I noticed the strange colors at my AD, too. At first I thought it was bad lighting in the store, but no... its the watches.

sakuraba · 14 April 2010, 01:11 AM

The new watches as a whole don't do anything for me. Apart from the Maxi dial which I really love, I really don't appreciate the supercase, PCLs, and even the ceramic bezels.

BMAN8 · 14 April 2010, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakuraba

The new watches as a whole don't do anything for me. Apart from the Maxi dial which I really love, I really don't appreciate the supercase, PCLs, and even the ceramic bezels.

I agree with your post. As well, I think once the old Sub models have cleared the shelves of the Ad’s, and the new Subs have unwound in the market, there will likely be a lot of watch folk who will have wished they had picked up one of the older styled Subs.

CoopJr · 14 April 2010, 02:37 AM

Can anyone add what discounts they are getting on the TT ceramic subs?...just curious

Blue isnt my cuppa but the black might be. I had the blue on my wrist a month or so ago and that watch felt great.

ArcticMoose · 14 April 2010, 02:40 AM

I guess I am biased, since I spent hours comparing the two, and finally decided to spend more for ceramic.

Here are my observations regarding the blue, after over four months without taking the watch off my wrist.

1. AD lighting is possibly the worst possible environment for the ceramic blue.

2. The blue does look flat if the 16610 is what you are used to, but I am continuously impressed by how it looks in different light.

3. I have had the opportunity to hang out with someone with a 16610 evenings and at nightclubs. In bad or sporadic lighting, there is no contest, the 116610 wins easily, the 16610 just looks black.

4. It matches!

Given the choice, would I make the same decision again? I am not 100% sure, but I think so.

mcjca · 14 April 2010, 02:40 AM

I was just in my AD yesterday and noticed the same thing. That blue looks hideous. It has more of that crayola, preschool blue rather than the deep, shimmery blue like the old ones.

Lion · 14 April 2010, 02:44 AM

I know I'm in the minority but I like the new Bluesy.....

Sub'erman · 14 April 2010, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lion

I know I'm in the minority but I like the new Bluesy.....

X2

The blue really changes according to the lighting... Gives it a special life. Always a different look.
I'm loving it!!(remember I traded in my old 16613LB that I had for 14 years to get it!!) No Regrets!!

Sub'erman · 14 April 2010, 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcticMoose

I guess I am biased, since I spent hours comparing the two, and finally decided to spend more for ceramic.

Here are my observations regarding the blue, after over four months without taking the watch off my wrist.

1. AD lighting is possibly the worst possible environment for the ceramic blue.

2. The blue does look flat if the 16610 is what you are used to, but I am continuously impressed by how it looks in different light.

3. I have had the opportunity to hang out with someone with a 16610 evenings and at nightclubs. In bad or sporadic lighting, there is no contest, the 116610 wins easily, the 16610 just looks black.

4. It matches!

Given the choice, would I make the same decision again? I am not 100% sure, but I think so.

great pics!!!

13 April 2010, 02:55 PM	#1
Watchdog "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Real Name: Junkyard Dog Location: The Doghouse Watch: I can't tell time Posts: 6,817	So disappointed . . . I keep trying to love the TT blue sub ceramic, but I can't. Background--I had always wanted a TT blue sub. In fact, I think this might be the quintessential Rolex watch. So when I read about the ceramic, I had to wait, as I am a big fan of the GMTIIC in all variations. When I first see the TT blue sub at the AD . . . Well extreme disppointment. I kept returning to take a look at it, but I could never fall in love with it. Even my children thought it looked strange. So my question is WHY did Rolex change the blue on this? Seriously, WHY? Could they not make the same color in ceramic? I don't know, but I would love to have an answer. If they could've made it the right color with the enlarged case, it would have been my favorite watch ever! But they didn't. The blue isn't right, and for the first time I'm actually considering a smaller Rolex with the proper blue.

13 April 2010, 07:31 PM	#6
HL65 TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Ken Location: SW Florida Watch: One on my wrist. Posts: 63,991	If you don't like it--don't force it! __________________ *SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT*

13 April 2010, 08:42 PM	#7
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 53,039	Myself quite dissapointed with the whole new slightly modded old Rolex range.Afraid a slightly new case and a ceramic insert dont excite me at all,but perhaps I will get to like the new clasp in time.But agree not over fond of the new colour blue in TT Sub dial or insert. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

13 April 2010, 10:01 PM	#10
jets "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Mario Location: CANADA Posts: 2,483	The black TT sub is a crazy beautiful watch. The blue is ugly though like you said. __________________ ♛ DJII 116234 · Submariner 126610LV · Yacht Master 42 226659 ✿ Pelagos 25600TN Ω X-33 Speedmaster Skywalker · 1861 Speedmaster Modsukoshi · SMP 2254.50 · SMP 2230.50 NAC · Seamaster 300 166.0324 · Genève 162.037 Seiko SLA033 Willard · SKX007

13 April 2010, 10:04 PM	#11
Doug507 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Minnesota, USA Posts: 167	I noticed the strange colors at my AD, too. At first I thought it was bad lighting in the store, but no... its the watches. __________________ GMT Master II 16760 Submariner 14060M

13 April 2010, 03:05 PM	#2
Omega_Precision Banned Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Henry Location: CA, US Watch: ing basketball Posts: 2,977	Ceramic is just that...ceramic. Bezel inserts are aluminum and the blue will give off a hint of a metallic hue.....

13 April 2010, 06:58 PM	#4
Singslinger "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: singapore Posts: 6,424	I totally agree - the new blue is nowhere as attractive as the old shade.

13 April 2010, 07:30 PM	#5
gelshocker Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 318	The way I see it, they're different blues, and attractive in their own special way I like the old 'deeper' blue, but also the new azure blue. Cheers,

13 April 2010, 09:15 PM	#9
gqllc "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Real Name: Steve Location: Albany NY Watch: Blue Bezel SubC Posts: 1,511	I could not warm up to it either so I recently bought the "older dial" blue TT sub...a M series !

14 April 2010, 01:11 AM	#12
sakuraba "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2009 Real Name: Jib Location: SJ, California Watch: sun dial Posts: 8,189	The new watches as a whole don't do anything for me. Apart from the Maxi dial which I really love, I really don't appreciate the supercase, PCLs, and even the ceramic bezels. __________________ F 14000 AirKing black F 16710 GMT Pepsi F 16570 Explorer II white T 16600 SD D 16610 LV "fine quality is remembered long after the pain of spending money" -Steve Mulholland

14 April 2010, 02:37 AM	#14
CoopJr "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Coop Location: U.S.A. Watch: Subs Posts: 6,455	Can anyone add what discounts they are getting on the TT ceramic subs?...just curious Blue isnt my cuppa but the black might be. I had the blue on my wrist a month or so ago and that watch felt great.

14 April 2010, 02:40 AM	#15
ArcticMoose "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: The Sea Posts: 1,894	I guess I am biased, since I spent hours comparing the two, and finally decided to spend more for ceramic. Here are my observations regarding the blue, after over four months without taking the watch off my wrist. 1. AD lighting is possibly the worst possible environment for the ceramic blue. 2. The blue does look flat if the 16610 is what you are used to, but I am continuously impressed by how it looks in different light. 3. I have had the opportunity to hang out with someone with a 16610 evenings and at nightclubs. In bad or sporadic lighting, there is no contest, the 116610 wins easily, the 16610 just looks black. 4. It matches! Given the choice, would I make the same decision again? I am not 100% sure, but I think so.

14 April 2010, 02:40 AM	#16
mcjca "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Real Name: Mike Location: CA Watch: SS Sub, BB GMT Posts: 139	I was just in my AD yesterday and noticed the same thing. That blue looks hideous. It has more of that crayola, preschool blue rather than the deep, shimmery blue like the old ones.

14 April 2010, 02:44 AM	#17
Lion "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Leo Location: Midwest Watch: GMT-II 16710 PEPSI Posts: 21,461	I know I'm in the minority but I like the new Bluesy..... __________________ SS GMT-II 16710 PEPSI(Z-serial#) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND BOYS IS THE PRICE OF THE TOYS!!! MontBlanc Meisterstuck Doue Silver Barley MontBlanc Meisterstuck Solitaire Doue Signum Proud Card Carrying Member of the Curmudgeons.....Yikes!!!

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