Removing cyclops

[m j b]

I've done it twice on non-Rolex watches, I used a heat gun and a sharp utility knife and a bunch of goo-gone to remove the residual glue. It looks great (IMHO).

As for the AR coating, if your watch has the coating on it and you are unhappy with the result, then you can get a new crystal. It hasn't cost you anything extra at that point.

It's a Rolex, it's a mass produced watch; replacing the crystal is no big deal, money-wise, complexity-wise or part sourcing-wise.

I get the appeal of the wart, it does help to see the date. I personally don't care for it.

[garyk]

Got my first Rolex, a Sub date in 1979 as a gift from my wife. Cannot imagine a Submariner without the cyclops!

[Brian Page]

If you don't like the cyclops get a 124060 or another non date. I wouldn't mess with the crystal

[Driver8]

I know this isn't the biggest mod in the world, but I never understand why people buy a watch that has a key feature that they apparently hate. Personally I don't like 4:30 date windows on watches, so consequently I never buy watches with a 4:30 date window. Simple.

There's plenty of other models out there without the cyclops, including the Sub, so I'd always say buy one of those instead of hacking around with original design.

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by Driver8

I know this isn't the biggest mod in the world, but I never understand why people buy a watch that has a key feature that they apparently hate. Personally I don't like 4:30 date windows on watches, so consequently I never buy watches with a 4:30 date window. Simple.

There's plenty of other models out there without the cyclops, including the Sub, so I'd always say buy one of those instead of hacking around with original design.

If it were up to me, I’d never buy a watch with a date. But there are so many watches that a no date isn’t an option. If you want a GMT or an Explorer 2 (which is my personal favorite) you have to get the cyclops.

[Chester01]

I mean the cyclops is there for functional reasons. Leave it.