Why no AR coating on Rolex

[baldyspoon]

Why don't Rolex have AR coatings on their watches, I see Omega,Breitling and lots of other brands do it so why don't Rolex.

[Chewbacca]

it wears off over time and i doubt it was ever a deal breaker for a purchaser. but the real answer is, nobody knows 100% why.

[The GMT Master]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

it wears off over time and i doubt it was ever a deal breaker for a purchaser. but the real answer is, nobody knows 100% why.

Rolex themselves have said that they consider the prominent crystal to be a core part of their design, and that an AR coating would detract from this

[SPACE-DWELLER]

There IS an AR coating on Rolex crystals with a cyclops these days... it's placed under the cyclops to get a better view of the date from an angle.

[LightOnAHill]

any coating can scratch and may not have the properties of the synthetic crystal

[caryyee]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

it wears off over time and i doubt it was ever a deal breaker for a purchaser. but the real answer is, nobody knows 100% why.

If it was applied on the underside of the crystal, as in many other watches, how would it wear off??

[Solo118]

Originally Posted by caryyee

If it was applied on the underside of the crystal, as in many other watches, how would it wear off??

Omega, Breitling etc do double sided AR on some watches.

The front can wear off or scratch etc

[mrbill2mrbill2]

I like being able to take reflected light off the bezel and shine it in peoples eyes. Cannot be done with AR coating.

cheers:

[Mephist]

Originally Posted by mrbill2mrbill2

I like being able to take reflected light off the bezel and shine it in peoples eyes. Cannot be done with AR coating.

cheers:

I agree. For me it is pointless to buy a watch if you can not shine it in peoples eyes.

[aardvarkbark]

FWIW, a 'how to remove AR coating' thread will pop up regularly over on the Omega forums.

[Bangel]

As alluded to already, scratches are only an issue if the AR coating is applied to the outer surface of the crystal.

I for one, would love to see Rolex apply AR coating to the underside of the entire crystal. I certainly think cyclops that have it are easier to read and look better than those without it.

[DJJon]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Rolex themselves have said that they consider the prominent crystal to be a core part of their design, and that an AR coating would detract from this

Thanks Chris, I agree that a big part of what makes a Rolex recognizable from afar is that the flat crystal with cyclops in most cases. I am glad to hear that Rolex Corporate appreciates this.

I have a watch with AR but it is key because the synthetic crystal is dome shaped.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Rolex themselves have said that they consider the prominent crystal to be a core part of their design, and that an AR coating would detract from this

The Rolex crystal sure do look pretty.

[nauticajoe]

The problem with the double AR coating is the bluish tint that you get. I like my Rolexes the way they are.

[Art 1]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Rolex themselves have said that they consider the prominent crystal to be a core part of their design, and that an AR coating would detract from this

Correct.

[Rashid.bk]

Originally Posted by mrbill2mrbill2

I like being able to take reflected light off the bezel and shine it in peoples eyes. Cannot be done with AR coating.

cheers:

Yes you can, I used to do it to my buddies all the time with my Planet Ocean.

Scratching the the AR coating is serious stuff and I found it very difficult but it eventually happened. My PO has scratches on the AR coating but they're imperceptible except when pointed out.
After wearing the PO for so long and now having a SD, I've learned to appreciate the AR of my PO, it makes the dial and markers pop out at you and very beautiful to photograph the dial. While the lack of coating on the SD has never made it actually difficult to tell time, I can say that in certain lighting situations the watch face looks bland and dull, while in the same situations my PO looks so clear and focused.

Since my wife has been wearing my PO lately I've had the chance to obsess and stare at them both while we're about and have made comparisons of everything that's visual. I do love the look my SD has in certain angles, it gleams and shines and looks very beautiful, so many reflections, the black oily dial, scalloped bezel and its edges, the hands/markers, etc. all compliment one another. The crystal shines and matches the rest of the watch to create a shimmer the PO cannot match, and I love it.
One side effect of the lack of AR is that the SD shows every kind of mark or smudge from fingers and such, and a simple wipe just doesn't clean it.
On the other hand, there's nothing like looking down at the dial of my PO and and seeing the crystal clear dial, invisible crystal, like I could touch the hands. The watch face looks like it's in sharp focus, nothing dull in any light. When you look at the dial you interact one on one with it, no crystal middle man.
My wife is anti-wis but she also made this observation between the two.

I just enjoy them both, and accept their qualities individually. Both awesome watches, the honeymoon with each is never over.
This stuff about scratching the ar is baloney, I'm more concerned about scratching my SD's bracelet and case which seem like scratch magnets. I'm ocd about my stuff and the scratches to the ar on my PO are nearly unnoticeable except under scrutiny.

The grass isn't always greener and since I like the way my SD looks, I'd have to say that before I'd say that Rolex should add AR, I'd first like to see a prototype, but it may be promising, maybe not.

[Manofsteelpt]

The DSSD needs the AR coating on that doomed crystal... Very distracting when viewing the time on it.

[joe100]

You are all thinking reactive; let's think proactive: dump sapphire and go back to acrylic.

Plastic for the win!

[77T]

The AR technology isn't really up to my expectations. I want it integrated into the crystal and polarize as well.

As long as they are still using surface coatings (whether inner surface or outer surface) I think Rolex should stay away from it - just becomes another headache for owners.