ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
7 October 2011, 08:42 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Steve
Location: Albany NY
Watch: Blue Bezel SubC
Posts: 1,511
|
How many people think the SS Daytona should have been upsized to 42 mm instead
Of the new explorer? I started to think about it and I got rid of my SS Daytona because it seemed to wear small to me. I started to get the itch for the white dial EXP42 and I realized it was the size I liked not necessarily the EXP itself. I think you can pick up a mint explorer II for $4500 for the old style which looks nice as is...any thoughts?
__________________
K-TT Datejust, Random Blue Bezel SubC |
7 October 2011, 08:43 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: Dennis
Location: L.I./N.Y.
Watch: SUBMARINER 14060M
Posts: 2,769
|
upsized, no! bigger is not always better. Leave classics alone.
|
7 October 2011, 08:47 AM | #3 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 304
|
|
7 October 2011, 08:55 AM | #4 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Florida, Canada
Watch: Rol/Seik/Tud/Omega
Posts: 30,244
|
|
7 October 2011, 08:55 AM | #5 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2011
Real Name: Mickey®
Location: Atlanta, GA
Watch: Swiss Made
Posts: 5,801
|
|
7 October 2011, 11:49 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Real Name: Katherine
Location: Massachusetts
Watch: DJ, Sub-C, Daytona
Posts: 218
|
|
7 October 2011, 12:49 PM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 131
|
I think it should at least come as an option
Ever since the launch of DJII and DDII, I always find it strange that the sports models are smaller than them.
I think Rolex has moved in that direction with DSSD and Exp II.... |
9 October 2011, 01:53 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Macau
Watch: 16610LV 14060m
Posts: 399
|
|
9 October 2011, 04:10 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,002
|
The Daytona is the perfect size at 40mm. I don't think the bezel scales well to 42mm on the Exp42.
I have a Speedmaster that I absolutely love. It is a great watch but would be even better at 40mm.
__________________
Licensed to kill time. |
9 October 2011, 04:43 AM | #10 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Real Name: Paul
Location: Midlands UK
Watch: GMT IIc, Daytona
Posts: 423
|
Don't make it any bigger, I downsized from a Breitling as I kept on smacking it on things (including door frames )
I could do with my GMTIIc being thinner, still not complaining too much though, saving for my WG Daytona, should have enough in about 2020 |
7 October 2011, 08:49 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2010
Real Name: Dan
Location: USA
Watch: This N That
Posts: 34,253
|
Bigger isn't always better.
__________________
When it captures your imagination, that's when you know you have found your passion. Loyal Foot Soldier of The Nylon Nation. Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons |
7 October 2011, 10:09 AM | #12 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Real Name: Anthony
Location: North Jersey
Watch: Daytona 116528
Posts: 3,426
|
The Daytona is fine as it is... leave it alone
|
7 October 2011, 10:15 AM | #13 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Seiko #SRK047
Posts: 34,460
|
The Daytona is perfect as it is.
__________________
JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner |
7 October 2011, 10:28 AM | #14 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Ari
Location: Florida
Watch: ...me go broke
Posts: 2,428
|
The only thing the Daytona is missing is a blue ceramic bezel, right Steve?
Instead of calling it the Shark, as has been taken, maybe the Dark, or perhaps Dork. I kid, I kid, seriously, I agree, the Daytona is just a little too small for me, I'm not one who needs an oversized watch, I'm very happy with my Sub C, but the Daytona wears noticeably smaller. And if I'm paying $10k for a watch I need to love it in all respects. :) |
7 October 2011, 11:03 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Real Name: Bryan
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,399
|
I like me a large watch, but would say leave it alone. It's clean.
__________________
Rolex / Panerai / Omega |
7 October 2011, 11:48 AM | #16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Real Name: Jay
Location: TEXAS
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 7,648
|
Please no.
|
7 October 2011, 12:11 PM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 299
|
IMO the daytona is a perfectly proportioned watch.
|
7 October 2011, 12:59 PM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Genaro
Location: Fresno Ca.
Watch: R O L E X
Posts: 4,466
|
44mm would be nice. But I still wouldnt buy it.
|
7 October 2011, 01:08 PM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: Carl
Location: Always moving
Watch: If you wish...
Posts: 22,039
|
I just came back from a thread showing the leopard Daytona, I think they should think about what they've done before they try something else with it!
This being said, I think 40mm is just fine! I know the DJII and the DDII might make it look small but unless you wear both at the same time I don't think it should be such a problem.
__________________
Mon corps c'est un pays en guerre sur l'point d'finir, Le général de l'armée de terre s'attend au pire, J'ai faim, j'ai frette, je suis trop faible pour me lever debout, On va hisser le drapeau blanc un point c'est tout. - André Fortin |
7 October 2011, 01:22 PM | #20 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arizona
Watch: SS & TT Daytonas
Posts: 471
|
Daytona is perfect as it is. No upsizing please.
__________________
Day-Date President, Champagne Dial SS Daytona Black Dial TT Daytona Slate Dial Omega Railmaster Tudor Submariner |
7 October 2011, 02:18 PM | #21 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fernwood
Posts: 3,455
|
Quote:
__________________
116613LN 16600SD 16610LV 116710 16710 16570 Speedy 3570.50 PAM25 Oris TT1 and a bunch of G-Shocks. Flipped: Daytona 116520 Seamaster 2231.80 |
|
7 October 2011, 02:21 PM | #22 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Sala hu din
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,782
|
Nooo
|
7 October 2011, 02:57 PM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NE
Posts: 421
|
no. I think it is perfect. I think the proportions of the new Explorer look a bit goofy. It's pefect as it is.
__________________
By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail. -- Benjamin Franklin |
7 October 2011, 03:00 PM | #24 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Real Name: Chuck
Location: Seattle
Watch: Rolex Submariner
Posts: 256
|
The proportions of the Daytona are classic and should be left as is....42mm would start to look too big similar to the new EXPII IMHO. Someday I shall have my white gold Daytona! Cheers
|
7 October 2011, 11:14 PM | #25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NB, TX
Watch: 3570.50
Posts: 1,016
|
If you want a 42mm watch, there's always the Speedmaster...
|
7 October 2011, 11:16 PM | #26 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Real Name: Paul
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 14,578
|
Leave it be at 40mm.
If Rolex made it slightly larger that would be a perfect excuse for another $1,500 price increase. The 904L steel doesn't come cheap you know. Hang on ....
__________________
..33 |
7 October 2011, 11:19 PM | #27 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Real Name: Eric
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,595
|
No, They should make it 50mm
I like it the way it is and I am sure they will leave it as such for a long time. |
7 October 2011, 11:26 PM | #28 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 19,706
|
Great side by side Dean. That really puts things in perspective!
|
8 October 2011, 02:07 AM | #29 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 2,177
|
dont touch perfection!
|
8 October 2011, 02:16 AM | #30 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: US
Posts: 3,257
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.