Would you like to see a Rolex Perpetual Calender?

[Matrim604]

I've always liked Rolex's down to business functionality, and respected their choice to not bother with useless "just for show" complications like moon phases or tourbillons etc. I know Rolex has done some of these things in the past, but in their current lineup at least their models are very simplistic when it comes to complications.

I've been thinking recently that it would be nice to see a Rolex perpetual calender model, perhaps 40-42mm. With recent threads about people fussing over having to change the date once every other month, I figured a model like this would actually be fairly useful for many people, and also allow Rolex to dip a little deeper into "haute horology" without having to become too frivolous.

Would anybody else be interested in a Rolex Oyster Perpetual Calender? Or is this just a dumb idea :)

[FlyingMoose]

Yes, with the caveat that I'd like an oysterquartz perpetual calendar.

[Watchdog]

Well . . .

"Very simplistic" is pejorative.

I prefer "straightforward."

Having said that, I would LOVE a perpetual calender offering.

This classic brand (VERY CONSERVATIVE APPROACH) can use a "shake-up" every now and then!

[Perdu]

I would like to see a perpetual calender but as you say, complications are not Rolex's thing.

[pz93c]

Nah.

[Colnago]

I've been adjusting the date for months with less than 31 days for the last 23 years, I'm sure others have been doing it for more than double that, for some weird reason I actually enjoy doing it......maybe it's just a good reason to play with it.....nope, they are fine as they are for me....

[niels74]

Had to go no , as i always have some that stop over time and i have to re-set anyway , but thats just me really.

[chicagowatchman]

Yes indeed!!!

[Yume-sama]

Actually, yes. I would like to see a Rolex version of this:



Only not $1.4 million.

[chicagowatchman]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Actually, yes. I would like to see a Rolex version of this:



Only not $1.4 million.

AWESOME WATCH!

[Wolfgang427]

Originally Posted by Perdu

I would like to see a perpetual calender but as you say, complications are not Rolex's thing.

They were years ago. Why not a new version of this?

[hooliganhooker]

Originally Posted by wolfgang427

They were years ago. Why not a new version of this?

Sweet watch...what is it?

[tomasulu]

yes! they should at least offer it on the more expensive models like the DD. it will be a much needed (imo) differentiation from the DJ.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Colnago

I've been adjusting the date for months with less than 31 days for the last 23 years, I'm sure others have been doing it for more than double that, for some weird reason I actually enjoy doing it......maybe it's just a good reason to play with it.....nope, they are fine as they are for me....

Have to agree and it must take around 3 minutes a year to do

Originally Posted by Matrim604

I've always liked Rolex's down to business functionality, and respected their choice to not bother with useless "just for show" complications like moon phases or tourbillons etc. I know Rolex has done some of these things in the past, but in their current lineup at least their models are very simplistic when it comes to complications.

Agree Tourbillons serve no real purpose in a wrist watch at all,only the fact the watchmaker can make them.And you would be quite surprised how many watch brands Tourbillons are made now in china and top quality made..Why there so much admiration for the tourbillon,perhaps the unquestioned and deserved prestige of Breguet, the inventor.

But the tourbillon works best in one position and in theory the tourbillon is always modifying the slight timing errors in the vertical position.The tourbillon does not correct position variations; it only prevents them being detected in the usual testing conditions. But when placed on say a vibrograph, the tourbillon reveals its weaknesses immediately.IMO the admiration given to the tourbillon is of the same nature as that given to a very clever magician.Who for instance makes a large object disappear its just a optical illusion,and looks good at the time.

The tourbillon does not correct anything,in wrist movements, it only prevents the detection of an error that still exists in natural gravity with wrist movement.The tourbillon is in fact an additional mechanism that consumes energy without producing anything except misinformation.The energy it consumes is taken from the reserve destined to the regulator. As a result, the balance with less energy will have reduced advantages.Now I agree totally the skill needed to make the cage plus tourbillon etc is a great horological skill.But in reality the watch is no more accurate that several other non tourbillon watches.

And even todays modern watches,with or without tourbillons are not so accurate as one produced almost 300 years ago.Gravity is one of the main causes of rate variations in watches. By creating the tourbillon,when Breguet thought he was eliminating its effects,It looks like it was an big error on his part.He only masked them like tourbillons do.Now if someone could come up and counteract the effect on gravity on a wrist watch.Now that would be a big break though but until then tourbillon IMO are just good to look at,and they are very expensive,and they make them because they can.But again looking at the other side of the coin,in Breguets day when he invented the tourbillon and the tools he had then.Now today with modern machines and computers puts a different perspective on the making side of tourbillons today.

[Bisquitlips]

Rolex needs to re-introduce some true complications in their line up. Currently the only timepiece they have that is even considered a minor complication is the YMII.

Mind you I am not including chronographs which are not really considered complications any longer by most watch aficionados.

That triple date moon phase really needs to make a return in the Rolex line IMO. Wow!!

[2th Dr]

I wouldn't care for one. I actually don't mind changing the date on a non 31 day month. Just another excuse to play with my babies!

[haakon59]

I would love to see a re-issue of the model that Wolfgang pictured, either a complete calendar or perpetual. But this hasn't been a priority for Rolex for several years now and they seem to do pretty well on the models they currently produce.

[Mosco]

Would LOVE to see a perpetual calendar, or at least a moonphase in a Rolex lineup. But can you imagine the pricetag?!

[mfer]

Originally Posted by Bisquitlips

Currently the only timepiece they have that is even considered a minor complication is the YMII.

I'm sorry, but "minor". Tell me another watch where the bezel interacts with the movement?