Why did Rolex get rid of holes on the lugs?

[Josunese1975]

Why do you think Rolex got rid of them? To discourage us from changing our bracelet to different straps so easily? Or for purely aesthetic reasons? Or little bit of both? I have three Datejusts and two of them with no holes. I would love to change to different straps but don't want to deal with the hassle, especially scratching the inner lugs and spring bars flying off. I change straps on the older Datejust with holes frequently and with ease. Why Rolex why? Bring back the cases with lug holes!

[Kevin of Larchmont]

I would guess they did it for purely aesthetic reasons. It’s still easy enough to change a strap or bracelet without the lug holes. I do miss them though.

[amh]

They don't look good

[fskywalker]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

I would guess they did it for purely aesthetic reasons.

+1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[thesharkfactor]

Just buy a classic Rolex if you want them.

[AF_Rob]

I’m a fan of lug holes as well. For old school esthetics, I’m surprised Tudor hasn’t brought them back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocket_Man]

Originally Posted by AF_Rob

I’m a fan of lug holes as well. For old school esthetics, I’m surprised Tudor hasn’t brought them back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tudor will put faux lug holes on their next Black Bay.

[Goose 104]

Originally Posted by Rocket_Man

Tudor will put faux lug holes on their next Black Bay.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by AF_Rob

I’m a fan of lug holes as well. For old school esthetics, I’m surprised Tudor hasn’t brought them back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Heritage Ranger (2014 - 2020) had lug holes (and straight end links like the first Explorer).

[Dan Pierce]

Love those lug holes.
dP

[Dr. Robert]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

Love those lug holes.
dP

Lug holes are sacrosanct


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Snowballs]

5 digit with holes for the win

[Mystro]

Aesthetic reasons and they did not want to encourage owners to take their bracelet off. Rolex now doesn’t want their owners to modify or even touch their watch other than winding and setting the time.

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by Josunese1975

Why do you think Rolex got rid of them?

Because they look bloody awful? Just guessing.

[UnderTheRadar]

Originally Posted by Harry-57

Because they look bloody awful? Just guessing.

It's true, they do look awful!

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by Harry-57

Because they look bloody awful? Just guessing.

LOL!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[enjoythemusic]

Holes went out of fashion.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Josunese1975

Why do you think Rolex got rid of them? To discourage us from changing our bracelet to different straps so easily? Or for purely aesthetic reasons? Or little bit of both? I have three Datejusts and two of them with no holes. I would love to change to different straps but don't want to deal with the hassle, especially scratching the inner lugs and spring bars flying off. I change straps on the older Datejust with holes frequently and with ease. Why Rolex why? Bring back the cases with lug holes!

I agree it is a bit of both but primarily it is to stop owners from tinkering w strap bracelet changes. Rolex goes through a great deal of trouble to insure the bracelets are not interchangeable with different models of their watches. Aesthetics are second.

You could pick up the official Rolex spring bar remover for the non lugholes watches ?

I was hooked on spring bars the very first time I used them.

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Holes went out of fashion.

Grand seiko still uses them in many of their models.

Practicality is never out of fashion

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by subtona

Grand seiko still uses them in many of their models.

Practicality is never out of fashion

They do today but funnily enough most Grand Seikos back in the 1960s and 1970s didn't have lug holes. They were mostly dressier back then, though.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by subtona

I agree it is a bit of both but primarily it is to stop owners from tinkering w strap bracelet changes. Rolex goes through a great deal of trouble to insure the bracelets are not interchangeable with different models of their watches. Aesthetics are second.

You could pick up the official Rolex spring bar remover for the non lugholes watches ?

I was hooked on spring bars the very first time I used them.




Grand seiko still uses them in many of their models.

Practicality is never out of fashion

Strangely enough Rolex chooses to include them on some of their current Tudor models. I'm not sure what their rationale is.

[Solo118]

Originally Posted by samson66

Strangely enough Rolex chooses to include them on some of their current Tudor models. I'm not sure what their rationale is.

The Tudor (such as the BB you pointed out) is heavily vintage themed. Vintage watches had the lug holes (which I think were amazing on the older tool watches) and in some cases riveted bracelets etc.

The newer Rolex models are much more luxurious, modern looking and high end on the price, and as you may know even the Rolex pure tool watches such as the Submariner or Explorer line are barely used like they used to.

[INC]

Originally Posted by Josunese1975

Why do you think Rolex got rid of them?

Because despite their best efforts, they couldn't put earrings in them.

[RFC]

Bevels/chamfers are also gone from the 6 digit Subs. Trends in fashion to move away from vintage eliminated the lug holes. Too bad.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

Love those lug holes.
dP

Originally Posted by RFC

Bevels/chamfers are also gone from the 6 digit Subs. Trends in fashion to move away from vintage eliminated the lug holes. Too bad.

Agreed, love them both

[watchluvr4ever]

Really it is one of the silliest moves I’ve seen in the watch, ‘em “jewelry” industry. Lug holes actually have a purpose. Aesthetically May look a little better, but functionally inferior. Some of Rolex own watchmakers can’t remove and install a bracelet without scratching the watch, lol. Ever seen a bracelet on a daily wearer that’s only been removed once in 5-10 years for a cleaning? I’ve seen some that would straight up make you vomit that had so much DNA and who knows what in them.

[Dirt]

The simple explanation is that Rolex probably wanted a cleaner look.
On a tool watch lug holes are one thing but on the more elegant curvy sides of a nicer watch case, it's another thing.
It was a natural progression as other brands were moving to no lug holes as well, so there was also the broader industry trend.
Technically I imagine it's easier to get a nicer finish when polishing the case sides because they don't have to be too concerned with losing the crisp edges of the holes.

No lug holes prevent people from scratching up that part of the lugs which may create more polishing work at service time under some circumstances.

I think that covers the bulk of issues around lug holes from the Rolex point of view of the world

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by AF_Rob

I’m a fan of lug holes as well. For old school esthetics, I’m surprised Tudor hasn’t brought them back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Technically, they never left. Royal still has them, as does the now-Asia-only Prince line.

Originally Posted by Dirt

Technically I imagine it's easier to get a nicer finish when polishing the case sides because they don't have to be too concerned with losing the crisp edges of the holes.

This was my thought. Nothing shows over-polishing more than the tips of lugs sticking out the ends of the holes.

[Norbert]

Let's bring back the stamped steel bracelets as well.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by Norbert

Let's bring back the stamped steel bracelets as well.

I assume you're being sarcastic but I actually prefer the old bracelets by far.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by Norbert

Let's bring back the stamped steel bracelets as well.

LOL good point