ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

skeen · 20 April 2015, 04:18 AM

And I want to talk about it. Can we please get to the bottom of this? I feel like I'm in the twilight zone!!

(Please note, this issue does not just affect the BLNR, but I will be referring to it throughout as it is the watch I bought.)

Reading the many other threads on this subject (the vast majority of which seem to have sprouted up within the last year), I have left them feeling wholly unsatisfied.

I have a new BLNR, and I love it. But trying it on, the first thing I noticed was my date magnification was significantly less than my Sub. But that was fine. It was an AD, it's a real Rolex...I assumed this was how it's supposed to be.

And maybe it is. And if it is, that's fine. But the facts are that multiple people on this forum have had their crystal replaced by Rolex RSC which resulted in a larger magnification.

Another fact is that on the Rolex website, the BLNR clearly has a larger mag. In spite of the fact that Rolex has now removed "2.5x" from their marketing materials.

I looked at watches yesterday at an official Rolex boutique. "Large" mags and "small" mags varied - randomly. The same models had different mags. Fact.

The general responses so far from apologists fall into 2 categories:

Apathy. "It's just a piece of glass...what are you so worried about?" I don't think I even need to respond to this one.
Try before you buy. "This is the watch you bought, you shouldn't have bought it if you weren't happy with it." Another indefensible statement - one ordinarily finds faults with their purchases later on.

I want to recap here on the facts:

Mags vary even on the same models. One GMT BLNR may have a large mag, another may have a small mag.
The mag for the BLNR on the Rolex website is clearly a large mag. (Presumably they are displaying the BLNR as it is to be represented today?)
Rolex has removed the "2.5x" statement on their marketing materials.
Rolex RSC has "fixed" this "issue" on many others' BLNR's.

And let me repeat this - if it is the case that newer Rolex's have a small mag, that's fine. But as of right now, we have no idea. Are watches being made today that vary?

It seems so. Given the fact Rolex has "resolved" this "issue" for many others' watches, and on the Rolex website today - the images show a large mag!

And that's not fine.

Thatguy · 20 April 2015, 04:25 AM

Only Rolex knows why and they are not talking. I pointed it out at an AD and the manager claimed it was the first time she noticed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

skeen · 20 April 2015, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thatguy

Only Rolex knows why and they are not talking. I pointed it out at an AD and the manager claimed it was the first time she noticed.

And this is why I feel like I'm in the twilight zone! What on earth is going on? I am perfectly happy to accept this is the new mag...perfectly happy. But what Rolex are saying, doing, and showing all contradict one another - randomly.

Cru Jones · 20 April 2015, 04:37 AM

Dial fonts change from time to time, so, it looks like the cyclops does, too.

Some will say the tolerance is too wide, others will say Rolex QC is poor, others will say it's not a big deal.

Personally, I find this whole issue kind of pathetic and sad for Rolex, but, hey, it's just a watch.

skeen · 20 April 2015, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

Dial fonts change from time to time, so, it looks like the cyclops does, too.

I'm absolutely baffled as to how the font could possibly change...but actually I think that's kind of cool. I mean, the font size isn't changing, which would have a significant impact.

All I know is that on this very day, the Rolex website shows the BLNR with a large mag. So presumably this is how it's supposed to be? Surely.

If you looked at my BLNR, and that one...you might conclude mine is fake. It would be understandable - would it not?

FTX I · 20 April 2015, 04:41 AM

Pathetic and sad gets another vote.

tkerrmd · 20 April 2015, 04:44 AM

Think we have covered this topic?

skeen · 20 April 2015, 04:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

Think we have covered this topic?

But we haven't!! That's the point. Please, tell me then - what's the conclusion. Tell me. Give me one conclusion that does not contradict any of the facts I listed. Please.

diracpoint · 20 April 2015, 04:45 AM

this one has a smaller mag, photo taken from the Rolex website ...

Dyim · 20 April 2015, 04:47 AM

I also wonder what's going on with their QC. Maybe they noticed the problem too late and with so many weak cyclops out there, they can only leave it as is.

It is not like a car where they can issue a recall or TSB. People that complain do get the crystal changed by RSC AFAIK, which is equivalent to TSB in the car world. That seems to me rolex is admitting there is a problem.

skeen · 20 April 2015, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diracpoint

this one has smaller mag, photo taken from the Rolex website ...

Very interesting indeed. And if you purchased that watch today, with a larger mag...you might very well be annoyed. Right?

It's like buying a DVD that has Daniel Day Lewis on the cover...but he's not in it. Would anyone say, "Hey, it's just a movie." Or, "Well Christian Bale was in it and he did just fine in the role."

If the production company made a mistake on the cover, that would be fine - if they told us. (Actually, you might question their competence, but I am willing to put that aside for the purposes of this discussion.)

Thatguy · 20 April 2015, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeen

But we haven't!! That's the point. Please, tell me then - what's the conclusion. Tell me. Give me one conclusion that does not contradict any of the facts I listed. Please.

The conclusion is we have no idea.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

skeen · 20 April 2015, 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thatguy

The conclusion is we have no idea.

Then it very well has not been covered, and it is very much open to discussion.

But the way, I cannot emphasise enough that I am willing to accept the following outcomes:

1. They changed the size of the mags, and this is the new mag.
2. They had QC issues.

Now - outcome 1 is contradicted by the image on the Rolex website (for the BLNR).

Outcome 2 is supported by the fact Rolex has "resolved" this "issue" for some owners, and supported by the fact a large mag is on the Rolex website - but contradicts outcome 1.

EDIT:

One has to understand that at some point, one must decide whether or not to have Rolex "resolve" this potential issue for them.

The question is not: well, does it bother you? The question is, how is the mag supposed to be?

IT Nerd · 20 April 2015, 05:02 AM

If I had to guess, it's a matter of QC issues. But who am I to say!

All i know is that if I were in the market for a particular reference, and I knew for certain that the reference was produced with a 2.5x date magnification, I would indeed pass on purchasing one with anything less (as I'm slightly OCD myself).

Onikage · 20 April 2015, 05:03 AM

How there can be any variation in a single model is beyond me. I'd expect much tighter tolerances for an impeccable brand like Rolex. This is only a recent issue and unheard of prior to about the end of last year. You're right to be persistent about it but we're all clueless I'm afraid.

skeen · 20 April 2015, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onikage

How there can be any variation in a single model is beyond me. I'd expect much tighter tolerances for an impeccable brand like Rolex. This is only a recent issue and unheard of prior to about the end of last year. You're right to be persistent about it but we're all clueless I'm afraid.

This is circumstantial, but one model I saw it consistently on was the TT GMT II. If I had bought any of the 5 I saw yesterday, they would all have had a small mag.

AkshayArgade · 20 April 2015, 05:06 AM

Here is my brand new rolex 116234 purchased from an authorised dealer. I am very happy with it. But after reading all these posts, I do find that the date is magnified smaller. Below are some photos , What do you think?

SMD · 20 April 2015, 05:07 AM

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? If we cannot answer the question definitively then it is worthy of discussion ad infinitum.

How can there be a "conclusion" if the only people that have the answer aren't speaking?

skeen · 20 April 2015, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AkshayArgade

Here is my brand new rolex 116234 purchased from an authorised dealer. I am very happy with it. But after reading all these posts, I do find that the date is magnified smaller. Below are some photos , What do you think?

Small mag.

skeen · 20 April 2015, 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMD

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? If we cannot answer the question definitively then it is worthy of discussion ad infinitum.

How can there be a "conclusion" if the only people that have the answer aren't speaking?

It is important to ask the question if you seek an answer. This is the biggest Rolex forum I know of. Am I wrong to assume that if I were to look for an answer, I should seek it here?

Given the prevalence of this issue (half the watches I saw in windows yesterday) I felt it worthy to continue the discussion. I don't think this is unreasonable.

SMD · 20 April 2015, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeen

It is important to ask the question if you seek an answer. This is the biggest Rolex forum I know of. Am I wrong to assume that if I were to look for an answer, I should seek it here?

Given the prevalence of this issue (half the watches I saw in windows yesterday) I felt it worthy to continue the discussion. I don't think this is unreasonable.

I prefer to not spin my wheels. But to each his own.

AkshayArgade · 20 April 2015, 05:16 AM

I did check the rolex website, they have removed the 2.5 times magnified keyword. I checked my owners manual, it says 2.5 times.
this contradicts one another

Fiddler · 20 April 2015, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeen

but we haven't!! That's the point. Please, tell me then - what's the conclusion. Tell me. Give me one conclusion that does not contradict any of the facts i listed. Please.

+1

AkshayArgade · 20 April 2015, 05:30 AM

I just hope rolex knows. If they accept that some models have smaller mags, am happy with it but if thats a fault, am worried because I bought this from an AD 5 days ago

skeen · 20 April 2015, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AkshayArgade

I just hope rolex knows. If they accept that some models have smaller mags, am happy with it but if thats a fault, am worried because I bought this from an AD 5 days ago

Well it's the uncertainty, isn't it? How do you know it's how it's supposed to be?

Your manual contradicts what's on your wrist. The images on the website contradicts what's on your wrist.

Travelin' Jack · 20 April 2015, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AkshayArgade

I just hope rolex knows. If they accept that some models have smaller mags, am happy with it but if thats a fault, am worried because I bought this from an AD 5 days ago

They absolutely know. My guess is they got a shipment of low mag cyclops and holding out for them to be remade would have put production significantly behind. I bet before too many more months they're back to 2.5x again.

I've seen it on a BLNR, polar Explorer II and a Hulk in person so far. I think in 20 years these low magnifying cyclops Rolexes are going to be worth more than their normal 2.5x counterparts.

skeen · 20 April 2015, 05:44 AM

I feel like we need to start a "small mag club"...if there's no issue :)

Dyim · 20 April 2015, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travelin' Jack

I've seen it on a BLNR, polar Explorer II and a Hulk in person so far. I think in 20 years these low magnifying cyclops Rolexes are going to be worth more than their normal 2.5x counterparts.

Interesting thought.

brandrea · 20 April 2015, 05:46 AM

The magnification appears to be different, what's the big deal?

skeen · 20 April 2015, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brandrea

The magnification appears to be different, what's the big deal?

The magnification appears to be different.

20 April 2015, 04:18 AM	#1
skeen "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: London Posts: 434	The cyclops magnification VARIES on new Rolex's And I want to talk about it. Can we please get to the bottom of this? I feel like I'm in the twilight zone!! (Please note, this issue does not just affect the BLNR, but I will be referring to it throughout as it is the watch I bought.) Reading the many other threads on this subject (the vast majority of which seem to have sprouted up within the last year), I have left them feeling wholly unsatisfied. I have a new BLNR, and I love it. But trying it on, the first thing I noticed was my date magnification was significantly less than my Sub. But that was fine. It was an AD, it's a real Rolex...I assumed this was how it's supposed to be. And maybe it is. And if it is, that's fine. But the facts are that multiple people on this forum have had their crystal replaced by Rolex RSC which resulted in a larger magnification. Another fact is that on the Rolex website, the BLNR clearly has a larger mag. In spite of the fact that Rolex has now removed "2.5x" from their marketing materials. I looked at watches yesterday at an official Rolex boutique. "Large" mags and "small" mags varied - randomly. The same models had different mags. Fact. The general responses so far from apologists fall into 2 categories: Apathy. "It's just a piece of glass...what are you so worried about?" I don't think I even need to respond to this one. Try before you buy. "This is the watch you bought, you shouldn't have bought it if you weren't happy with it." Another indefensible statement - one ordinarily finds faults with their purchases later on. I want to recap here on the facts: Mags vary even on the same models. One GMT BLNR may have a large mag, another may have a small mag. The mag for the BLNR on the Rolex website is clearly a large mag. (Presumably they are displaying the BLNR as it is to be represented today?) Rolex has removed the "2.5x" statement on their marketing materials. Rolex RSC has "fixed" this "issue" on many others' BLNR's. And let me repeat this - if it is the case that newer Rolex's have a small mag, that's fine. But as of right now, we have no idea. Are watches being made today that vary? It seems so. Given the fact Rolex has "resolved" this "issue" for many others' watches, and on the Rolex website today - the images show a large mag! And that's not fine. Attached Images

20 April 2015, 04:45 AM	#9
diracpoint 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Planet Earth Posts: 1,386	this one has a smaller mag, photo taken from the Rolex website ... Attached Images

20 April 2015, 05:03 AM	#15
Onikage "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: England Watch: 16710, 16628 Posts: 7,757	How there can be any variation in a single model is beyond me. I'd expect much tighter tolerances for an impeccable brand like Rolex. This is only a recent issue and unheard of prior to about the end of last year. You're right to be persistent about it but we're all clueless I'm afraid. __________________ GMT II 16710 TRADITIONAL ( D- Serial #) ROLEXFANBOY P-Club Member #4

20 April 2015, 05:06 AM	#17
AkshayArgade "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Real Name: akshay argade Location: earth Posts: 497	datejust cyclops Here is my brand new rolex 116234 purchased from an authorised dealer. I am very happy with it. But after reading all these posts, I do find that the date is magnified smaller. Below are some photos , What do you think? Attached Images

20 April 2015, 05:16 AM	#22
AkshayArgade "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Real Name: akshay argade Location: earth Posts: 497	I did check the rolex website, they have removed the 2.5 times magnified keyword. I checked my owners manual, it says 2.5 times. this contradicts one another Attached Images

20 April 2015, 04:25 AM	#2
Thatguy "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Real Name: Wayne Location: California Watch: Rolex, PAM Posts: 3,303	Only Rolex knows why and they are not talking. I pointed it out at an AD and the manager claimed it was the first time she noticed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

20 April 2015, 04:37 AM	#4
Cru Jones 2025 TitaniumYM Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: CET Posts: 35,613	Dial fonts change from time to time, so, it looks like the cyclops does, too. Some will say the tolerance is too wide, others will say Rolex QC is poor, others will say it's not a big deal. Personally, I find this whole issue kind of pathetic and sad for Rolex, but, hey, it's just a watch.

20 April 2015, 04:41 AM	#6
FTX I "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Real Name: Flavio Location: N/A Posts: 14,654	Pathetic and sad gets another vote.

20 April 2015, 04:44 AM	#7
tkerrmd "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Tom Location: In a race car! Watch: ME RACE PORSCHES Posts: 24,123	Think we have covered this topic?

20 April 2015, 04:47 AM	#10
Dyim "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Canada Posts: 2,237	I also wonder what's going on with their QC. Maybe they noticed the problem too late and with so many weak cyclops out there, they can only leave it as is. It is not like a car where they can issue a recall or TSB. People that complain do get the crystal changed by RSC AFAIK, which is equivalent to TSB in the car world. That seems to me rolex is admitting there is a problem.

20 April 2015, 05:02 AM	#14
IT Nerd 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: VA Watch: me flip Posts: 1,022	If I had to guess, it's a matter of QC issues. But who am I to say! All i know is that if I were in the market for a particular reference, and I knew for certain that the reference was produced with a 2.5x date magnification, I would indeed pass on purchasing one with anything less (as I'm slightly OCD myself).

20 April 2015, 05:07 AM	#18
SMD "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Real Name: SMD Location: LGA/EWR/ORD Watch: AP/PP Posts: 3,711	How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? If we cannot answer the question definitively then it is worthy of discussion ad infinitum. How can there be a "conclusion" if the only people that have the answer aren't speaking?

20 April 2015, 05:30 AM	#24
AkshayArgade "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Real Name: akshay argade Location: earth Posts: 497	I just hope rolex knows. If they accept that some models have smaller mags, am happy with it but if thats a fault, am worried because I bought this from an AD 5 days ago

20 April 2015, 05:44 AM	#27
skeen "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: London Posts: 434	I feel like we need to start a "small mag club"...if there's no issue :)

20 April 2015, 05:46 AM	#29
brandrea 2025 TitaniumYM Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Real Name: Brian (TBone) Location: canada Watch: es make me smile Posts: 79,619	The magnification appears to be different, what's the big deal?

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