# Ok



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

After a few years of not been bothered, i'm fancying one again.

What set it off was seeing a very good copy with salmon dial. So I looked at Air Kings.

Now Jot's chucked a spanner in with his GMT.

Right. I don't need a GMT hand. So which should I go for? Money wise it's obvious. I would like opinions on looks & the like.

Pauluspaolo - you need not post. I know what you will say


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Paul sorry about the spanner









Sea Dweller, you would get bored with a dress watch IMHO


----------



## Stan (Aug 7, 2003)

I like some of them Paul, John's is a belter.









I don't think I'll ever own one but I do respect what Rolex has done to keep the watch industry going over the years.

I certainly wouldn't mind a nice, vintage, oyster cased Rolex.

Very nice.


----------



## pg tips (May 16, 2003)

I think Jot's right MrC. Knowing your tastes it's got to be the SD.

I'd quite like an air king but hey wouldn't we all?


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

This is worth linking to again, written by James Dowling:

It's OK to hate Rolex

Well Rolex comes in for a lot of criticism on the forum at times.

From my own point of view, they currently make a few great watches and a lot of Godawful ones (the Cellini line for instance). There is no doubt they got it right with the GMT, Sub and SeaDweller, of whatever vintage.

At the end of the day watches are about keeping time, and my near 40 year old Sub is easily the most accurate mechanical watch I own. I can wear this for literally weeks at a time with it only varying from the radio-controlled clock by a few seconds each way, then returning to the correct time. (Er OK it took a few trips back to Rolex to get it this way). It is also one of the most legible, old lume or not.

Si


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Cheers so far guys.

I've had a Sub, so SD don't appeal. It's started with this salmon dial. Seen a turn o graph Datejust with one - but Â£2600 - no no.

Got 3 spaces in my box - 2 reserved. Hoping this will be my last - without selling first.


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

Well, if you are going for a non-sports Rolex have a good look around and get a nice vintage one.

By the way, if you are into details, the SD looks very different to the Sub due to its noticeably smaller dial and deeper case.

Si


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Si said:


> This is worth linking to again, written by James Dowling:
> 
> It's OK to hate Rolex
> 
> ...


 Si - great link.

I know they patented many things. However I didn't know anything about them funding training schools. It's true isn't it - public opinion/comments have given them a bad name?

I hope I am not sounding gobby/boastful, but I have had 6 Rolex in the past.

But then I discovered AP.

I also went loopy when I first got into the game - I admit. At least 5 of those wee bought new. So I lost a lot of dosh.

Did I learn the hard way? Most likely.

The thing is.............

Despite all the spending, big gap in time where I ignored them - i'm looking again.

Does that say something?


----------



## 036 (Feb 27, 2003)

I suppose what it says is that Rolex have always had some watches that have been designed to fit with what the public sees as good-looking and stylish. Once they get it right they leave it alone.

Even though they may occasionally make a duff one, by keeping their quality control up among the best and keeping tight control of prices, they remain a great brand that have made so many great watches, and who have managed to make their buyers feel they have something special despite the fact that they are mass produced in 100s of thousands a year.

Look at how many brands have sunk over the years - part of the reason is that designing a watch that appeals to people in the long run is easier said than done.

Paul, I don't think a dress Rolex would suit you... get a SD!


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Mrcrowley said:


> Despite all the spending, big gap in time where I ignored them - i'm looking again.
> 
> Does that say something?


 What goes around, comes around









You will be buying an Orfina MkII next


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

JoT said:


> Mrcrowley said:
> 
> 
> > Despite all the spending, big gap in time where I ignored them - i'm looking again.
> ...


 I did look at it & think for a moment









But it's just not what i'm into lately.

Si doesn't think I would fit in with a Rolex dress watch, just there are more choices in dial designs, etc. Having had a Sub before, I see the SD as just one without the cyclops lens, so not too bothered about those.

Like the GMT with burgundy/black bezel, plus i've handled one some time ago.

Other problem is my fascination with the engine turned bezels you get on the Air Kings/Dates. Think they are great.


----------



## Guest (Dec 23, 2004)

Paul

I know you like the salmon pink dials (I do as well) but with the Air kings and oysterdates at 34mm and the DJ's at 36mm don't you think they may be a bit small for your admitted liking for gigantic watches?

Regarding the Sub/SD thing, although they look similar at first glance actually everything is different on a Sea Dweller to a Sub only the movement is the same.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

neil said:


> Paul
> 
> I know you like the salmon pink dials (I do as well) but with the Air kings and oysterdates at 34mm and the DJ's at 36mm don't you think they may be a bit small for your admitted liking for gigantic watches?
> 
> Regarding the Sub/SD thing, although they look similar at first glance actually everything is different on a Sea Dweller to a Sub only the movement is the same.


 You may be right Neil.

I know the GMT, SD, etc are tool watches. So they don't cater much for changing them. Just be nice to have a dial that's not black!

It is a pain that the Datejusts aren't at least 40mm. I can wear a smaller one. Just as you say, I prefer bigger. I try to look at what the watch is now. My AP is ony 40mm just. But bearing in mind what it is, I obviously live with it.


----------



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

Hi

The Explorer is a very nice watch, in fact I reckon it looks looks a lot better in the flesh than in the photo's.

I used to have an Explorer & have regretted selling it ever since.

Good luck in your choice.

Dave


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

Explorer is a good choice.Date and Datejust are good too.

I too have owned a few Rolex all modern except a 5512 Sub.If I were buying again,it would be a steel bubbleback oyster


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Seriously thinking about Explorer now, despite it's size.

Salmon dial still bugging me though. Remember that's what started all this


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

Paul,Rolex do a Date with Salmon dial with 12,3,6,9 markers and no date







Smooth bezel on oyster bracelet,very very nice


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

AlexR said:


> Paul,Rolex do a Date with Salmon dial with 12,3,6,9 markers and no date
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Yes I like the half arabic/indices dial.

Never heard of a Rolex date without a date though









I know what you mean. Think they just call those Oyster Perpetual.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

This is nice methinks


----------



## sssammm (Oct 7, 2003)

Mr C.

i had that exact rolly in a previous life, wore it for ages, now ive got the silver dial Yachtmaster which is Great..go into a rolly dealer and try them all on then youll get a better idea

sam


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

I prefer a smooth bezel,but nice watch







I know where the pic comes from too


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

AlexR said:


> I prefer a smooth bezel,but nice watch
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 So do I - why I cut the name off









Merry Chrsistmas lads BTW!


----------



## ETCHY (Aug 3, 2004)

Have you considered the Explorer 1 ?

I know it's not got the Salmon coloured dial but it's a nice size, has a smooth bezel & the treatment of the markers/ numbers looks great.

Best wishes

Dave


----------



## abraxas (Oct 21, 2003)

Paul, if you don't want a black-face watch get this:










john


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

abraxas said:


> Paul, if you don't want a black-face watch get this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I've had one John









Think the want of a samond dial has been outweighed now by other things.

Never had an Explorer I so thinking of that.

GMT also. The separately changing hour hand will save me some time when setting it.

There are a few I like so the functionality thing has become an issue as well now.

All this started from wearing that damn watch the other night


----------



## Guest (Dec 27, 2004)

Mrcrowley said:


> This is nice methinks


That *is* beautiful.

I could go for one of those.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Thanks Neil - it's cool.

This is getting more awkward. Think i'll have to have a poll.......


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

OK I tried to do a poll & got the message 'poll is not a choice' or something. What am I doing wrong?


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

Paul,stop messing about with a poll and buy one









If you like Salmon dials(I do)then get one,no other will satisfy.You have owned a few Rolex before so go for the unusual choice like I do







A Explorer is nice but just a black dial watch,if you dont want a Sub or dweller,and if you really think about it honestly you have no real need for a GMT.You are not a pilot,international banker(







)traveller.GMT is a nice watch but if you buy one just to know the time in the US where friends live,then not such a good idea(been there too







)

I have to say go classy,Date,Airking or DateJust.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

AlexR said:


> Paul,stop messing about with a poll and buy one
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Good points.

But the GMT keeps calling. Plus unless I buy new, its a git to get exactly what you want in the dress watch group.


----------



## Sargon (Feb 24, 2003)

Why not compromise??


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

I had one of those copper(Bronze) dial GMT2 on a Jubilee







My favourite out of the Sub,SD,GMT.Very classy,they look 100% better in the flesh that in any pic I have seen,although that is a great pic









That model or dial colour was Clint Eastwoods choice,he wears one in Dirty Harry,Fifefox and a few other films(I think







)

Many dismiss that watch,it is not a popular model for Rolex,and you can get them a little cheaper used.


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

Paul,If you want a GMT get one.My opinion,sell the Landmaster and any others,except the AP.Buy the Rolex you want,even if new.You will only regret not getting the one you really wanted


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Sell my Landmaster?mmmmmmm.........

Don't think I could do that. Nothing I actually want to sell at present. I will get the advice of my good lady on this one.

Sargon

I never liked that copper look. However as someone said, it looks better in real life. So I may give it a chance.


----------



## jasonm (Nov 22, 2003)

> I had one of those copper(Bronze) dial GMT2 on a Jubilee












I think Ive said it before.....Alex has had 'em all.....Lucky bugger


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

jasonm said:


> > I had one of those copper(Bronze) dial GMT2 on a Jubilee
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Good point Jase.

I thought i'd had a shedload but bloody hell









You had a Daytona Alex?


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

I have not quite had them all,but look at me now.I have nowt
















Never had a Daytona Paul,never liked them that much,although the bi-metal is nicer than the steel IMO and a much better buy









If you can get to see a Bronze dial in person,you may be impressed I was,and they are a little different from the norm.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

AlexR said:


> I have not quite had them all,but look at me now.I have nowt
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 You have nowt?!

I had a Bi-met Daytona once. Went into shop 'just to look'.

Came out wearing it.

Just looking at them now. I couldn't justify buying one these days. Apart from fact they've gone up Â£1500 in 5 years, I have no need for a chrono.

For a long while I have thought of replacing my Bi met GMT Master, probably partly why i'm oggling them again now. However 6-700 quid difference between those & steel ones. Do I really need the gold?

Someone suggested selling my Landmaster. Don't think I could do that. However least I know I have a few good ones to trade if it came to it.


----------



## AlexR (May 11, 2003)

Only have a couple of watches now,nothing expensive.Had to sell them all off to pay some bills







Can't see me replacing them soon.

Gold in a watch is down to taste,I like it very much,it adds a bit of shine to a watch,all steel is fine and so is Ti,bit nothing beats gold or plat for that bling thing
















As most here know,I try not to follow fashion or watch trends,and steel is a trend IMO,I like the old days when owning a gold watch meant something Steel has its place on tool watches,I could not imagine owning a gold Sub,but would like a Daydate.AP really started the ultra expensive steel watch thing IMO with the RO.Great watch but for the price of an Offshore I could own a nice used Daydate


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

AlexR said:


> Only have a couple of watches now,nothing expensive.Had to sell them all off to pay some bills
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Indeed you could. If you had the cash to go buy a new, standard Royal Oak date, you would only be 400 or so quid short of the cost of a steel/gold Daytona!

Like you say though, personal taste. I could flog my AP & get a good 2 tone Rolex, or 2 steel ones(preowned of course). However i'll keep my Royal Oak thanks


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

I have decided.


----------



## pauluspaolo (Feb 24, 2003)

> I have decided.


Oh lumme - what's he gone and ordered now









Whatever it is Paul I look forward to seeing it


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Mrcrowley said:


> I have decided.


 You know it makes sense Paul


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

JoT said:


> Mrcrowley said:
> 
> 
> > I have decided.
> ...


 Well????


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

JoT said:


> JoT said:
> 
> 
> > Mrcrowley said:
> ...


 What - you want to know before I get it?

I can't order it until Monday


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Mrcrowley said:


> I can't order it until Monday


 Good man


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

JoT said:


> Mrcrowley said:
> 
> 
> > I can't order it until Monday
> ...


 Thank you.

Just had a scare though. It's not a bloody Bank Holiday tomorrow is it


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Mrcrowley said:


> Just had a scare though. It's not a bloody Bank Holiday tomorrow is it


 Yep


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

JoT said:


> Mrcrowley said:
> 
> 
> > Just had a scare though. It's not a bloody Bank Holiday tomorrow is it
> ...


 AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! !!!















THANKS JOT YOU B!!!!!


----------



## abraxas (Oct 21, 2003)

Gives you time to think, Paul. The more you think, the less you buy. Thinking is free.







Happy New Year.

john


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

abraxas said:


> Gives you time to think, Paul. The more you think, the less you buy. Thinking is free.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Yes, time to ponder..................

But that can be worse sometimes


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

It can also give you time to think about additional purchases ... works both ways


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

JoT said:


> It can also give you time to think about additional purchases ... works both ways


 Yes I know


----------



## abraxas (Oct 21, 2003)

Mrcrowley said:


> Yes, time to ponder..................
> 
> But that can be worse sometimes


 It might be worse but it's cheaper.









john


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Well, I'm pondering & thinking.

That watch is still playing on my mind.

I don't think i'm going to fall for a cheaper alternative by tomorrow.


----------



## Mrcrowley (Apr 23, 2003)

Mrcrowley said:


> Well, I'm pondering & thinking.
> 
> That watch is still playing on my mind.
> 
> I don't think i'm going to fall for a cheaper alternative by tomorrow.


 I didn't.


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Mrcrowley said:


> Mrcrowley said:
> 
> 
> > Well, I'm pondering & thinking.
> ...


 Top man


----------

