When did Rolex STOP being a tool watch?

[Mike1066]

Gents:

This being the vintage forum, I think most of us would agree that Rolex divers are no longer the tool watches that they started off being? If I get flamed for that comment, I get flamed. So be it...

Anyway, if you agree with the above comment, when do you think Rolex divers stopped being tool watches? Was it the white gold surrounds? Was it the $pricey$ ceramic bezels? Was it the loss of the maxi dials?

Would love to hear everyones' thoughts. And, if you think it is still a "tool" watch - then feel free to flame away

V/R

Mike

[mldaytona]

The current sports models from Rolex (Sub C, Deepsea, Explorer I & II, GMT C) are no less tool watches than their older siblings from decades ago. What makes them appear fragile is that disease called OCD.

[patek.wis]

Originally Posted by Mike1066

Gents:

This being the vintage forum, I think most of us would agree that Rolex divers are no longer the tool watches that they started off being? If I get flamed for that comment, I get flamed. So be it...

Anyway, if you agree with the above comment, when do you think Rolex divers stopped being tool watches? Was it the white gold surrounds? Was it the $pricey$ ceramic bezels? Was it the loss of the maxi dials?

Would love to hear everyones' thoughts. And, if you think it is still a "tool" watch - then feel free to flame away

V/R

Mike

Still a tool watch, I love my 1680, but I love the new models too. They have their own place in time.

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by mldaytona

The current sports models from Rolex (Sub C, Deepsea, Explorer I & II, GMT C) are no less tool watches than their older siblings from decades ago. What makes them appear fragile is that disease called OCD.

I do think it depends on how much you are willing to pay for the repair of a damaged part on a given watch. For me, the tool watch ended with the introduction of the ceramic bezel inserts. It is too expensive to replace a ceramic insert for me to chance breaking one while diving since it is more brittle than the aluminum.

Hence the reason that I dive with my 5513 or 14060m. I also prefer my watches used for diving to have drilled-through lug holes.

[Mike1066]

Originally Posted by Jason71

I also prefer my watches used for diving to have drilled-through lug holes.

Ahh, yes. Another modification I forgot to mention in my original post.

[patek.wis]

Originally Posted by Jason71

I do think it depends on how much you are willing to pay for the repair of a damaged part on a given watch. For me, the tool watch ended with the introduction of the ceramic bezel inserts. It is too expensive to replace a ceramic insert for me to chance breaking one while diving since it is more brittle than the aluminum.

Hence the reason that I dive with my 5513 or 14060m. I also prefer my watches used for diving to have drilled-through lug holes.

Playing devils advocate - $1000 for a ceramic insert. Over $1000 for a 5513/1680 original insert. =)

[conrail]

Whenever it was that the first person said: "I got a scratch on my Rolex - help!"

[pdoukas]

Originally Posted by conrail

Whenever it was that the first person said: "I got a scratch on my Rolex - help!"

Lol


Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse my spelling, punctuation, and brevity.

[Racer X]

Originally Posted by Jason71

For me, the tool watch ended with the introduction of the ceramic bezel inserts.

+1. IMO, this was the point at which fashion trumped function.

[phillycheez]

When they stopped with the drilled lugs. The model that kept it going was the 14060 which is now discontinued.

[liuk3]

Originally Posted by Mike1066

... when do you think Rolex divers stopped being tool watches? ...

when they started making much cheaper watches with both depth gauges as well as bottom timers on them...

[Darlinboy]

I say still tool-watch CAPABLE,


But NOT USED as such by many!

[Dr. Robert]

bah humbug....when they (Rolex) got rid of lug holes in their SS watches.

[Owterspace]

Originally Posted by mldaytona

The current sports models from Rolex (Sub C, Deepsea, Explorer I & II, GMT C) are no less tool watches than their older siblings from decades ago. What makes them appear fragile is that disease called OCD.

I agree :)

[SubmarinerMariner]

Didn't it stop being a tool watch the moment a buyer didn't actually buy it to go diving? The watch was designed for divers as a tool, therefore the moment a non-diver bought it cuz it looked 'good', it ceased its purpose as a tool watch for said consumer and became a fashion/jewelry/wrist ornament item...

I mean, I'm a diver - but I dive with more specialized watches for diving and seldom with a Submariner, SD, or PAM anymore...has it ceased to be a tool watch for me - probably, I DID buy it as a fashion/jewelry/wrist ornament to begin with...

[ecsub44]

Originally Posted by patek.wis

Playing devils advocate - $1000 for a ceramic insert. Over $1000 for a 5513/1680 original insert. =)

$1000 for a 5513 insert? Not for a 5513 from 1990...

[Check]

Agree with all of the posts above.

When the person wearing it dreads damaging it for the cost to repair or replace it, it stopped being a tool watch. When cheaper alternatives...

Definitely still tool capable but with lots of finesse and style to boot!

[Chipmunk]

May not be a tool anymore but it's still a cool watch.

[JohnnyS.]

When steel watches started costing $8000.

[Dr. Robert]

Originally Posted by JohnnyS.

When steel watches started costing $8000.

X2

[caryyee]

When they became too expensive relative to the average wage ...

In 1973, a SS Sub Date cost $385
Source: http://www.minus4plus6.com/PriceEvolution.htm

In 1973, the average annual income in the US was approx $12000.
Source: www2.census.gov/prod2/popscan/p60-093.pdf

So, a SS Sub date cost less than 2 weeks pay (gross) in 1973. Not too unaffordable. Can afford to be used as a proper tool watch.

In 2011, average income was approx $45000
Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...me-table_N.htm

So, these days a Rolex Sub data is approx 10 weeks gross pay. ie 5 times the relative cost in 1973 making it a lot more out of reach to most people ....

[JohnBoy]

Another question - when did they start? It wasn't long ago when watches were just watches. Some were gold, some were chrome plated steel, some newer ones were stainless - but all were just watches. And Rolex made some very good ones of all types. The gold ones were relatively expensive and usually worn for dressy occasions and by better-paid office-type workers. The steel and chrome, much more affordable, worn by almost everyone else. If the job was dirty and the watch might get harmed, the watch was often put in a pocket - even a cheap watch was too expensive to bust up needlessly. Thats what I did with my Bulova in those days (mid-60's).

But Rolex (and others) developed watches to fill a specific need - like diving, boat racing, etc. These were relatively expensive, but had a real purpose that was harder on the watch - resulting in designing them with heavy, non-corrosive stainless cases, etc. Thats probably when the term 'tool' was added to describe those watches. But Rolex has made very dressy, but more fragile, watches since the beginning.

Its only in more recent years (say 20 -30, a short time in terms of watches) that Rolex recognized an opportunity and filled (or developed themselves) a big market niche by manufacturing their stainless 'tool' lines in TT and all gold. Men, primarily, liked the 'tool' look, but wanted those bigger, macho, impressive watches to be dressier - to wear at the party and in the office. I worked in heavy construction and manufacturing-oriented industries for years and saw my bosses go from wearing Timex-type watches (cheap, tough, expendable) in the 70's - to the late 80's, when it became the thing to wear expensive gold watches, kinda like bankers, only in the heavy 'tool' designs, along with some pretty hefty YG diamond pinkie rings - sorta the 'macho' and 'got money' look combined. Management, and the construction trades, alike, also started making some pretty significant wages at that time, as well. Such is fashion, hell, nothing wrong, and nothing new under the sun there.

So, I don't think that Rolex watches are all 'tools' - never were, never will be - and they didn't quit the on the 'tools.' Their 'tool' line just became more expensive, right along with macaroni and hamburger. And that line became ever more popular with the general population. Its just business, marketing, whatever - Rolex will try to be whatever the market wants, while still being Rolex, of course, and will make just as much profit as they can. And we like their products. My opinion.

[phillycheez]

Originally Posted by johnnys.

when steel watches started costing $8000.

+10000000

[jolimont]

[QUOTE=caryyee;3430361So, these days a Rolex Sub data is approx 10 weeks gross pay. ie 5 times the relative cost in 1973 making it a lot more out of reach to most people ....[/QUOTE]

interesting, thanks

[Mickey®]

My opinion...this last round of changes...PCL on GMT, Ceramic bezels....just overall more shinny has kind of choked out the last bit of "tool" from them....

OH and the end of these for sure was a bad thing....IMHO

[Frogman4me]

When they stopped using drilled lug holes and the introduction of ceramic bezels for me.

[Psmith]

Probably around the same time that nobody (at least in the general population) needed mechanical 'tool' watches anymore

[Mickey®]

Originally Posted by frogman4me

when they stopped using drilled lug holes and the introduction of ceramic bezels for me.

+2

[oldbronco]

awhile back, Someone posted an old National Geographic ad which featured a beat up Datejust that the legendary Red Adair wore while fighting oil rig fires. there was another ad posted which featured the Oysterquartz worn to the top of Everest by a German team. now,Rolex ads just tell buyers to wear some bling like our featured celebrity. Rolex stopped being a tool watch when management decided, a few years ago, they could make lots more money selling bling. do you notice how the new Tudor models are more tool worthy & better looking than any of the new Rolex models?

[jhupp]

I'm interested in the replies on this.

While I don't know when they stopped being tool watches I would say that probably 90% of the people that have them do NOT use them as tool watches.

I still wear mine for work and I very much consider it a tool watch. If you look years ago Red Adair was wearing a YG president as a tool watch. I would be very interested in knowing when more people started buying them as a fashion accessory than as a tool. I would guess maybe mid 70s? Early 80s?