ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Paladin · 8 March 2012, 03:19 AM

And if not driving more WIs's into vintage, there is probably a revision to the definition of "classic Rolex" in the offing...

Oh yeah... Tudor just popped onto my radar!

GeoGio Greece · 8 March 2012, 03:46 AM

..did already for me ! New ones are out of my likes !

STEELINOX · 8 March 2012, 03:47 AM

Proud to say, "I don't own any sapphire ROLEX" ~ !

Paladin · 8 March 2012, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

Proud to say, "I don't own any sapphire ROLEX" ~ !

Show off!

azguy · 8 March 2012, 04:08 AM

Not "vintage" but "modern classics" for me

pre-2008

Frogman4me · 8 March 2012, 04:18 AM

Nothing new ever really catches my eye. I love Patina!

Dr. Robert · 8 March 2012, 05:27 AM

I hope not......it will drive the prices waaaayyyyy up!

Paladin · 8 March 2012, 06:03 AM

Kinda funny watching all the old women hang wringing, finger pointing and what not over in the General (modern) discussion forum with the news from Basel.

HERITAGE82 · 8 March 2012, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paladin

Kinda funny watching all the old women hang wringing, finger pointing and what not over in the General (modern) discussion forum with the news from Basel.

Jagatai · 8 March 2012, 07:56 AM

I hope so

capote · 8 March 2012, 08:16 AM

Hello. I'm new in this section. Recent events made me re-evaluate modern Rolex and drove me here

HERITAGE82 · 8 March 2012, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capote

Hello. I'm new in this section. Recent events made me re-evaluate modern Rolex and drove me here

.....WELCOME!!

jdc · 8 March 2012, 07:10 PM

Plenty of room for both, mine range from 1950 to 2002, I would happily have the new sub in my collection or Tudor Heritage.

Puffy · 8 March 2012, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

I hope not......it will drive the prices waaaayyyyy up!

that should make your 1655 retirement fund shoot up mate

Puffy · 8 March 2012, 07:15 PM

i'm always on the hunt for good vintage that hasn't or won't be pedestrianised

The only model we saw yesterday that tempted me slightly was the blue dial YM but at £7600 it's not cheap.

One could however buy the blue dial and stick it on the old 16622 as well as knock a new clasp on..

I do like the Sky-Dweller but i'm not going to fork out £30,000 for it. Then I'd rather buy a nice Patek

AG1 · 8 March 2012, 07:43 PM

My impression is that there are a lot of people, WIS's included, who appreciate
the fat cases, ceramic bezel inserts, improved bracelets, etc. So I don't think
the new releases will drive more WIS's into vintage. The vintage world has its
own little life and is little affected by current offerings, imho. Having said that,
I do believe that "classic Rolex" will come to include the previous generation of
sports watches, so I think prices will be kept quite stable or slowly increasing
for these types of models (i.e. 16610, 16600, 14060m, etc.)

Speaking of Tudor, they're onto my radar as well. Going back a few years, there's
no way I would ever have considered buying any of their watches which I would
describe as "90's shopping mall designs" but the heritage line really works for me.
Except for one thing, and that's the sapphire chrystals which really should have
been plexi - I would happily have paid the same or more for a plexi option. But
I'm presumably in a minority.

Puffy · 8 March 2012, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AG1

My impression is that there are a lot of people, WIS's included, who appreciate
the fat cases, ceramic bezel inserts, improved bracelets, etc. So I don't think
the new releases will drive more WIS's into vintage. The vintage world has its
own little life and is little affected by current offerings, imho. Having said that,
I do believe that "classic Rolex" will come to include the previous generation of
sports watches, so I think prices will be kept quite stable or slowly increasing
for these types of models (i.e. 16610, 16600, 14060m, etc.)

Speaking of Tudor, they're onto my radar as well. Going back a few years, there's
no way I would ever have considered buying any of their watches which I would
describe as "90's shopping mall designs" but the heritage line really works for me.
Except for one thing, and that's the sapphire chrystals which really should have
been plexi - I would happily have paid the same or more for a plexi option. But
I'm presumably in a minority.

that's true

i love the DSSD, Exp42 and i also love the refs the former replaced and to me it's great to have old and new to show the evolution of this fine brand

Andad · 8 March 2012, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEELINOX

Proud to say, "I don't own any sapphire ROLEX" ~ !

Proud to say I don't own any polywatch.

MitchSteel · 9 March 2012, 02:26 AM

Vintage and "classic" for me, with the exception of GMT IIC( love that beauty).

BH13GMT · 9 March 2012, 02:37 AM

For me I like a bit of both, I always compare my watches to my cars.

GMTC, every day driver (Merc R-class Diesel)
1680 Red, is the weekend crusier (old skool Merc Coupe pillarless)

its not an "either or" thing for me. I like both types but my 1680 feels special everytime I wear it. I dont know why but it does.

joe100 · 9 March 2012, 03:36 AM

Firmly planted in the Vintage World.

Dr. Robert · 9 March 2012, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puffy

that should make your 1655 retirement fund shoot up mate

forgot about that Puff, my retirement portfolio

......from your mouth to the financial gods ears.....I hope the prices for vintage do go up.....I'm aging fast....retirement is around the corner, yipeeee, no more racing with rats.

gt0279a · 9 March 2012, 03:50 AM

My Submariner turned 25 this year.

I'll take a matte dial & lug holes over anything cerachrome

DiamondJack · 9 March 2012, 04:21 AM

I like both but the good thing about vintage is that they can never change them..... they are what they are and that's final.........you never have that feeling of needing to buy the latest model .......to get the new face, get those extra 2mm.... etc etc.

My worry is that watch manufacturers are gradually heading down the "disposable" culture that ruined pre-owned car values.....

Therefore, whilst I still like to see completely new models like the SKD (even though I don't particularly like it myself), I struggle with new variations of an existing model since, it just devalues the last version .....

Now I clearly appreciate that when Rolex have iconic names like Submariner, GMT, Explorer, Daytona etc, this will always happen..........

But it doesn't happen or matter with vintage

8 March 2012, 03:19 AM	#1
Paladin "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: So. California Posts: 1,232	Wondering if the new Rolex lineup will drive more WIS's into vintage? And if not driving more WIs's into vintage, there is probably a revision to the definition of "classic Rolex" in the offing... Oh yeah... Tudor just popped onto my radar! __________________ 1601, 1675/3, 16753, 16750, 16750, 16700, 16610, 18238

8 March 2012, 03:46 AM	#2
GeoGio Greece "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: George Location: Athens, Greece Watch: es --> A lot ! Posts: 2,327	..did already for me ! New ones are out of my likes ! __________________ Rolex owner since 1971. 5513 and 16700 the loved ones. DJ WG Jubilee 16170 for wife - U series Oyster Perpetual WG 177234 for daughter V-series

8 March 2012, 03:47 AM	#3
STEELINOX 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: Sink-O! Location: a praire in AZ Watch: ROLEX-less atm... Posts: 14,021	Proud to say, "I don't own any sapphire ROLEX" ~ ! __________________ *Positive Waves Baby* Lug Hole Loyalist / Chamfer Line Inspector INFORTHE WIN SUB-MAH-REEEN-ER ~ !

8 March 2012, 05:27 AM	#7
Dr. Robert 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Bob Location: U.S.A. Watch: 1655 Posts: 64,277	I hope not......it will drive the prices waaaayyyyy up! __________________ Founder & Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

8 March 2012, 06:03 AM	#8
Paladin "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: So. California Posts: 1,232	Kinda funny watching all the old women hang wringing, finger pointing and what not over in the General (modern) discussion forum with the news from Basel. __________________ 1601, 1675/3, 16753, 16750, 16750, 16700, 16610, 18238

8 March 2012, 04:08 AM	#5
azguy Banned Join Date: Sep 2011 Real Name: ------- Location: ------- Watch: --------- Posts: 12,609	Not "vintage" but "modern classics" for me pre-2008

8 March 2012, 04:18 AM	#6
Frogman4me Banned Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Maryland Posts: 6,268	Nothing new ever really catches my eye. I love Patina!

8 March 2012, 07:56 AM	#10
Jagatai "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Philip Location: NY Posts: 851	I hope so

8 March 2012, 08:16 AM	#11
capote "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Real Name: Daniel Location: Sweden Watch: 16570 Posts: 7,315	Hello. I'm new in this section. Recent events made me re-evaluate modern Rolex and drove me here

8 March 2012, 07:10 PM	#13
jdc "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Martin Location: UK Posts: 7,023	Plenty of room for both, mine range from 1950 to 2002, I would happily have the new sub in my collection or Tudor Heritage.

8 March 2012, 07:15 PM	#15
Puffy "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 12,485	i'm always on the hunt for good vintage that hasn't or won't be pedestrianised The only model we saw yesterday that tempted me slightly was the blue dial YM but at £7600 it's not cheap. One could however buy the blue dial and stick it on the old 16622 as well as knock a new clasp on.. I do like the Sky-Dweller but i'm not going to fork out £30,000 for it. Then I'd rather buy a nice Patek __________________ Fine Quality is Long Remembered After the Pain of Spending Money is Forgotten

8 March 2012, 07:43 PM	#16
AG1 Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 104	My impression is that there are a lot of people, WIS's included, who appreciate the fat cases, ceramic bezel inserts, improved bracelets, etc. So I don't think the new releases will drive more WIS's into vintage. The vintage world has its own little life and is little affected by current offerings, imho. Having said that, I do believe that "classic Rolex" will come to include the previous generation of sports watches, so I think prices will be kept quite stable or slowly increasing for these types of models (i.e. 16610, 16600, 14060m, etc.) Speaking of Tudor, they're onto my radar as well. Going back a few years, there's no way I would ever have considered buying any of their watches which I would describe as "90's shopping mall designs" but the heritage line really works for me. Except for one thing, and that's the sapphire chrystals which really should have been plexi - I would happily have paid the same or more for a plexi option. But I'm presumably in a minority.

9 March 2012, 02:26 AM	#19
MitchSteel "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Real Name: MDangerSteel Location: Canada Watch: Vintage Rolex Posts: 2,301	Vintage and "classic" for me, with the exception of GMT IIC( love that beauty). __________________ Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons Probability of survival is inversely proportional to the angle of arrival---Capt. Rage Don't believe anything in aviation, 'till V1---Mitch Danger Steel

9 March 2012, 02:37 AM	#20
BH13GMT "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Real Name: Paul Location: UK, Dorset Watch: and learn Posts: 2,636	For me I like a bit of both, I always compare my watches to my cars. GMTC, every day driver (Merc R-class Diesel) 1680 Red, is the weekend crusier (old skool Merc Coupe pillarless) its not an "either or" thing for me. I like both types but my 1680 feels special everytime I wear it. I dont know why but it does. __________________ Rolex Sub 1680, Rolex GMT 116710LN, Rolex Datejust 16220 Salmon Dial (the Mrs), Tudor BB58, Tudor Pelagos Blue and Several Seiko's ************************************************ *************** "last one in the chopper is a rotten egg" Jonathan Quayle Higgins III

9 March 2012, 03:36 AM	#21
joe100 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: New Mexico Watch: Explorer Posts: 12,840	Firmly planted in the Vintage World.

9 March 2012, 03:50 AM	#23
gt0279a "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: Steve Location: Georgia Watch: All of them Posts: 579	My Submariner turned 25 this year. I'll take a matte dial & lug holes over anything cerachrome

9 March 2012, 04:21 AM	#24
DiamondJack "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: London Watch: Quite a few Posts: 4,315	I like both but the good thing about vintage is that they can never change them..... they are what they are and that's final.........you never have that feeling of needing to buy the latest model .......to get the new face, get those extra 2mm.... etc etc. My worry is that watch manufacturers are gradually heading down the "disposable" culture that ruined pre-owned car values..... Therefore, whilst I still like to see completely new models like the SKD (even though I don't particularly like it myself), I struggle with new variations of an existing model since, it just devalues the last version ..... Now I clearly appreciate that when Rolex have iconic names like Submariner, GMT, Explorer, Daytona etc, this will always happen.......... But it doesn't happen or matter with vintage

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