No display backs for Sumbmariner

[Mickey®]

I think most times when people ask why no display back on the back of Rolex (Sub etc) we say "Water Resistance"...most of the time.

I guess this proves it wrong...must be we just have an ugly movement!




What others out there have display back and Sublike WR?

[MrJ320]

A lot of Panerai's have 300m WR as well and display back. If I recall correctly the 312 and 320 have 300m WR.

[dddrees]

Thomas Preik makes clear casebacks for various Rolex watches. I hear after they are installed they pass the pressure test.

It's not that it's imposssible, it's just not something Rolex does on their professional watch line.

http://www.beepworld.de/members97/uh...-preik/usa.htm

[padi56]

Just cannot see any point of a clear case back on any sports watch tool watch unless you wear the watch dial down,but then it would not be much use as a dive watch.

[Lion]

Good point on the Omega but on a Sub there is not much to see anyways...but of course that is just my opinion and you know what they say about opinions.......

[Mickey®]

Originally Posted by padi56

Just cannot see any point of a clear case back on any sports watch tool watch unless you wear the watch dial down,but then it would not be much use as a dive watch.

Padi
You mean to tell me you've never worn your watch upside down??

[capote]

And the Omega has twice the water resistance the Sub has...not that anybody on these boards would ever need it, but still.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Mickey®

Padi
You mean to tell me you've never worn your watch upside down??

Quite true and have no liking to see the movement, as long as it ticks and keeps good time and lasts for 50 plus years thats good enough for me.Like a engine in a car just want to see it when it needs a service and check the oil same for my watches.

[jmsrolls]

Well, maybe not ugly - just plain:



Personally, I like display backs. As someone once said, "A watch with a display back is like having two watches. A display back provides a diversion during boring meetings."

Unfortunately, the rotor of automatics block the view unlike the manual wind Lemania movements in the Omega Speedmaster Professionals:



that are rhodium plated with “côtes de Genève”.

But why should Rolex spend money embellishing movements that could be better spent on marketing?

Fr.John+

[Fredrik]

Originally Posted by padi56

Quite true and have no liking to see the movement, as long as it ticks and keeps good time and lasts for 50 plus years thats good enough for me.Like a engine in a car just want to see it when it needs a service and check the oil same for my watches.

I bet you could make a fortune making aftermarket hoods in plexi that would show the engine in all it's beauty!

[JP(Canada)]

I'm happy they don't do it. Never seemed right to me on a dive watch, but yes, there are a few out that do it, and the most recent Planet Oceans sure are pretty to look at, I can't disagree with that.

[Mickey®]

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

Well, maybe not ugly - just plain:



Personally, I like display backs. As someone once said, "A watch with a display back is like having two watches. A display back provides a diversion during boring meetings."



Fr.John+

SWEET!!!!!!!!!!!
Still loving my 3574.51 LMOTM! Thanks for the heads up or I would have never known to ask!!!

[Ljung]

agree with Fr.John+, Rolex's looks plain and not much interesting to show. They are here to serve the main purpose: keep good timing and reliable.

but who knows some day Rolex's mind in this area changes and we might have sub with display caseback (since now we have already seen diameter moving up from 40mm :) )

[Mickey®]

Originally Posted by Ljung

agree with Fr.John+, Rolex's looks plain and not much interesting to show. They are here to serve the main purpose: keep good timing and reliable.

but who knows some day Rolex's mind in this area changes and we might have sub with display caseback (since now we have already seen diameter moving up from 40mm :) )

Yeah I heard the new Non Date Submariner will:

• Have no lug holes
• Be 44mm
• Have Ceramic Bezel
• Display Back
• Come in 52 different Dial colors

[bondtoys]

tbh, that Omega 8500 may be technically well, but visually it's not exciting me at all.

[Mickey®]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

tbh, that Omega 8500 may be technically well, but visually it's not exciting me at all.

I agree. I actually don't like the red lettering...its like they tried to hard to call it out.

I like viewing a good movement though...

[azguy]

IMO that Omega is amazing I love the clear casebacks and seeing all the inner workings it's unfortunate the Rolex's are so plain...Oh, well, another reason to own an Omega

[Cru Jones]

WR has nothing to do with it.....A part of Rolex's history and tradition is the oyster case. A case with a display back may be just as robust, but it's not an oyster.

That, and, personally, I like the feel of SS on the skin over glass.

[cajunron]

Originally Posted by jmsrolls

Well, maybe not ugly - just plain:



Personally, I like display backs. As someone once said, "A watch with a display back is like having two watches. A display back provides a diversion during boring meetings."

Unfortunately, the rotor of automatics block the view unlike the manual wind Lemania movements in the Omega Speedmaster Professionals:



that are rhodium plated with “côtes de Genève”.

But why should Rolex spend money embellishing movements that could be better spent on marketing?

Fr.John+

Fr. John, I will have to respectfully disagree. I think the finishing on the Rolex movement's are second to none. I don't think they are plain, but surprisingly decorated and a work of art. While I wouldn't want Rolex to start making see thru casebacks, I do think they are beautiful. I do love your Omega's BTW!