SS Daytona Dials hard to read

[Alan G]

I am in the Market for an SS Daytona and have picked up some excellent advice and information from RF members , I am fortunate enough to have one on hold at an AD, I have no issues with the size or no date and could live with either dial although initial preference is Black, I had the opportunity to try both black and white locally but came away quite shocked, the dealers lighting wasn't the best and I am at he point where I need reading glasses to read or use a pc but not for general use but the black dial was just a blur which I put down to glare the silver/black dial and hands, bad light and my eyes and the white seemed a bit better , I did try both outside the store in the daylight and both were better but this has rocked my confidence and left me wondering how others have got on with this and wether one dial colour has been more preferable to those who have experienced this issue
I still really want one and thought it was noticeably more comfortable that my Sub, I have an IPhone for the time lol! but it isn't really the point

Any advice would be greatly appriceated

I realise it's not the watch but which dial is most suitable?

Alan

[RFX45]

That is one of the biggest complaints I've read here on the Daytonas.

I personally have no problem with it, in either color.

[ssultan]

The black one for sure, I find the white very readable, at least on the ones I've handled since I've never owned one!

[Rackness]

I am not normally one to deter fellow enthusiasts from a new watch purchase but it sounds to me that the Daytona may not be for you. I know mechanical watches are basically jewelry these days but to me it is a watch and should at least serve as such.

Of course this could just be a good reason to visit the eye doc and get an update to that prescription ;)

[Time Exposure]

My preference is the black dial (I have owned both black and white).
I find I can pick up the index/hand pretty easily. From there, I cannot see what mark it points to. However, since I have stared for hours at the dial, I can tell by the angle of the hand how many minutes have elapsed. Much like telling time on a Movado Museum watch where the dial is completely devoid of markers. Just a smaller scale.
When I had a lot of recliner time (recovering from foot surgery), I actually photographed each passing minute of the subdial, and studied the pictures. I understand however not every one has that luxury of time or motivation!

[jjnd08]

I have a white, and I can read it just fine at 4 am when I wake up and glance at the lume. I have no issues reading it any time of day.

I am also 29 though with 20/20 vision.

[RFX45]

I'm curious if an AR on the watch would hep legibility on the watch? It seems to play some factor in reading difficulty especially at certain angles?

[simongpaez]

I hate to admit it but I am starting to experience this with my black SS, if I don't have my glasses on just forget it, I just can't tell the time, same thing If I want to use the chrono function , it is really hard for me to read, not happening with any other pieces so far.
I love the watch and it was my "grail" for so long that it is hard to admit.

[subtona]

Waited 20 years to get one ... Sold in less than 6 months because it was illegible for me.

Ps. I owned the white dial (V serial), I believe the black is even more challenging to read.

Btw. In the 20 years I was waiting for a Daytona to come my way I settled (at the time for my second choice) for a Submariner. In the end, I will always own diver submariner or sea dweller and appreciate it for its supreme legibility and simplified function of timing up to 60 minutes

[Investr]

I have a black, and I definitely agree its definitely harder to read than say a DJ or Sub. The silver hands get kind of lost in the silver chrono rings, BUT this watch is 100% sweet and I grin to myself every time I glance at the time(which does take a little longer to compute)........

[Chewbacca]

Originally Posted by subtona

Waited 20 years to get one ... Sold in less than 6 months because it was illegible for me.

same with me.

i also missed the date feature and pcl's were not working. (sigh)

[Alan G]

Simon
Thanks for the feedback, Interesting you are only having the problem although I am not surprised, on the Daytona is it in poor light or most conditions? Have you considered if the white dial would be more legible?
Like I mentioned Black is my desired option but its looking to be a risk ref the future

[3sheets86]

I'm under 30 and don't need glasses. I have a black dial Daytona and I love it but it is bad to read at a glance. I have a sub too and you can just glance and see exactly where the big hands are pointing. You really have to look at the Daytona but I don't mind too much as the face is so nice!

[ufboy73]

i have a daytona and the time is basically easy enough to read (you master the 'tilt' soon enough), thought not as easily accesible as the GMT or Sub or others

to use the chrono function is much more difficult.

very easy to put up with the above in order to have the Daytona on the wrist though.

[locutus49]

My WG meteorite dial is not easy to read compared to my Sub, but I can read it at a glance in any light. In the dark, not so much. But I knew that going in. I'm 64 and can read the dials okay, but the meteorite is probably the hardest to see clearly. But worth it, IMO.

[landroverking]

There are easier chrongraphs to read. SMP comes to mind.
I do think it gets easier to read the Daytona the longer you have it.
I have a TT and had the watchmaker on first service paint the stop watch secound hand black. Makes it much more readable when timing.
FYI last service was at RSC Dallas and much go my surprise they didn't change it back to gold.

[tkerrmd]

if you cant see a watch why buy it?

[Jlsd]

I find myself staring at my white dial SS Daytona for no reason. Even more, I look at it and do not even know what time it is!!!
For me it is a pleasure to look at the dial on the Daytona. Just glaring to know the time would be a waste.

[WaxedElvis]

I wear bifocals and have a white dial Daytona and have no problems at all telling the time. I also have an Omega Speedmaster, black dial, and have no problems telling time on it either. As far as the sub-dials for the chrono functions, on both watches I have to look carefully and focus to see them. However, I actually find the sub-dials on the Daytona easier to read but on both watches, the sub-dials are difficult to read.

[simongpaez]

Originally Posted by Alan G

is it in poor light or most conditions? Have you considered if the white dial would be more legible?

yes it is is basically in poor light conditions but not the easieste to read overall,

I have thought about it but I have read mixed comments, some people say white is harder to read than black and the other way around, I love my black dial but if white is easier to read I will flip it in a heart beeat.

[Chewbacca]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

if you cant see a watch why buy it?

i'd expect that from padi but not an md.

i still love ya tom!

[locutus49]

Totally.

Originally Posted by Jlsd

I find myself staring at my white dial SS Daytona for no reason. Even more, I look at it and do not even know what time it is!!!
For me it is a pleasure to look at the dial on the Daytona. Just glaring to know the time would be a waste.

[tkerrmd]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

i'd expect that from padi but not an md.

i still love ya tom!

just trying to save people some money!

[Ken B]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

if you cant see a watch why buy it?

+1
It's not the watch... It's your eyes. I always crack up when people refuse to wear glasses.
JMHO

[iclick]

I think the readability issues discussed here is a matter of degrees. I've become spoiled with the ergonomic excellence of my GMT, which I can read in a millisecond's glance in almost any light. When I bought my white-dial Daytona about nine months ago I was quickly taken by how hard the watch was to read in low light and sometimes even in good ambient light. My eyes are good up close and at a distance without glasses, but "mastering the tilt," as has been described here, is something I can identify with. More often than not reading the time requires a prolonged glance that takes some twisting of the wrist to zero in on it. The problem is the polished SS hands that sometimes reflect dark, sometimes light tones, and more often than not they do not contrast well against the white dial that's already busy with three subdials. Finding the primary hands in all that maze is the first trick.

I also have a white-dial panda Tudor chrono with similar contrast issues and it isn't any better. My black-dial panda Tudor chrono is better but only marginally, and my GMT is the readability winner by a long shot over all the chronos. I believe Rolex could've sacrificed some cosmetic appeal in the interest of readability, like applying black primary hands for the white-dial watches and white or brushed SS hands for the black-dial variants. All that said, I've been wearing my two Tudor chronos for the last month or so and I've become accustomed to the tilt maneuvers and prolonged glances, so I think if you like the appeal of the chronos, which I certainly do, you'll get used to the readability tricks like I have and it'll all become second nature. After all, if the only reason we wear watches is to tell the time we'd all be wearing cheap digital quartz watches.

[locutus49]

You make a great point. My Daytona is only harder to read when compared to the simple uncluttered dial of the Sub. On its own, when wearing it all day, Daytona is quite easy to tell the time.

Originally Posted by iclick

I think the readability issues discussed here is a matter of degrees. I've become spoiled with the ergonomic excellence of my GMT, which I can read in a millisecond's glance in almost any light. When I bought my white-dial Daytona about nine months ago I was quickly taken by how hard the watch was to read in low light and sometimes even in good ambient light. My eyes are good up close and at a distance without glasses, but "mastering the tilt," as has been described here, is something I can identify with. More often than not reading the time requires a prolonged glance that requires some twisting of the wrist to zero in on it. The problem is the polished SS hands that sometimes reflect dark, sometimes light tones, and more often than not they do not contrast well against the white dial that's already busy with three subdials. Finding the primary hands in all that maze is the first trick.

I also have a white-dial panda Tudor chrono with similar contrast issues and it isn't any better. My black-dial panda Tudor chrono is better but only marginally, and my GMT is the readability winner by a long shot over all the chronos. I believe Rolex could've sacrificed some cosmetic appeal in the interest of readability, like applying black primary hands for the white-dial watches and white or brushed SS hands for the black-dial variants. All that said, I've been wearing my two Tudor chronos for the last month or so and I've become accustomed to the tilt maneuvers and prolonged glances, so I think if you like the appeal of the chronos, which I certainly do, you'll get used to the readability tricks like I have and it'll all become second nature.

[Art 1]

One of the reasons I sold mine was the that it was so hard to read, the chrono was useless for my eyes. I will say that it was the most comfortable Rolex that I have owned.

[Watch Professor]

Yes, they are hard to read, especially the black. If you are looking for a chronograph that is easy to read, try the Omega Speedmaster Professional.

[Chai]

Maybe its not the right forum to say this, but IMHO i found the best readable chronograph out there is the Omega Speedmaster Profesional aka Moonwatch. Maybe it could be an alternative to the Daytona ?

[Nycturbovr6]

It's a daytona who cares if you can read the time or not