The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 21 December 2022, 03:06 PM   #1
inadeje
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
inadeje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Miami
Watch: me lose count.
Posts: 5,907
Rolex Bracelets and Clasps Over The Years

While sat looking at my collection and wearing older 5 digit bracelets back-to-back with contemporary 6 digit bracelets I’ve come to the following conclusion.

Rolex possibly went too far with it’s bracelet and clasp designs in an effort to make these, quite frankly, too durable (if that’s possible?)

The 5 digit SEL bracelets with the pressed steel clasps are the most comfortable, well-centered (clasp) and perfectly balanced, combining an ideal weight and feel on the wrist.

The 6 digit bracelets with heavy cast clasps are over-engineered, too industrially perfect and nowhere near as lithe and comfortable as the 5 digit.

Looking at the 6 digit clasps it appears Rolex’s brief was to create an indestructible item that is simply just too, well, solid. The aesthetic appearance has also suffered as these clasps have become bigger and bigger. Huge reinforced cast slab sides, in most cases covering the whole width of lower wrist, even on my 7 3/4. It has grown markedly worse with the latest 21mm bracelets with their clasps looking like an appendage from Marvel’s Iron Man franchise.

Wearing a 5 digit SEL bracelet after wearing a 2022 latest iteration is a huge comfort advantage in favor of the veteran design. The solidity of the 5 digit SEL bracelet is perfectly fine for a few decades of daily use. The pressed steel clasp, while less substantial than the cast variants, is perfectly serviceable and light, taking up just one third of the lower wrist real-estate compared to the newer 21mm clasps. It distinctly seems that Rolex went overkill in it’s plight to make a solid feeling watch.

Making things indestructible can sometimes be both a disadvantage and discomfort. The finesse is gone in today’s iterations. Instead, replaced by overzealous engineering and atomic bomb proof designs that have lost the delicacy of the older bracelets and clasps.

What say other TRF members? Does anyone wear back-to-back contemporary with neo-vintage and not feel Rolex went too far solving a problem that nobody had?
__________________
♛ 218206 Roman ♛ 116689 ♛ 126710BLRO ♛ 16520 white ♛ 16523 white ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1R-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Bronzo 671 & 111, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Cartier Santos XL - Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41
inadeje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 December 2022, 03:28 PM   #2
Old Expat Beast
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
Old Expat Beast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Adam
Location: Far East
Watch: Golden Tuna
Posts: 28,826
Yes, I much prefer the bracelet and clasp on my late 16570 Explorer II than what was on my Milgauss. Lighter, more comfortable and way easier to micro-adjust with the clasp holes and easier to open. Clasp is a bit tinny, but they do last decades and you can tighten them up yourself as they get older (a bend here, a tweak there). Pretty good middle ground, though, are my Black Bay and Heritage Ranger (both ETA models), which have some of the good points of both.
__________________
_______________________
Old Expat Beast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 December 2022, 03:42 PM   #3
joli160
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
joli160's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NL
Watch: Yachtmaster
Posts: 14,761
The glidelock I must admit is an abomination, just weird how big it wears and the clumsy adjustment requiring to remove the watch from the wrist.
It’s the one thing I don’t like about my Submariner.
Than again the DSSD style clasp fits well, because that watch is already totally over engineered and such a clasp does not look out of place on that particular watch.

I do prefer the Oysterlock clasps compared to the old style 5 digits style.
The easy link that comes with it works like a charm and the machined steel feels good. Sourced a modern DJ clasp for my 16622 and feel that this upgraded the wearing experience.

My favourite clasp
Attached Images
 
__________________
Day Date 18238, Yachtmaster 16622, Deepsea 116660, Submariner 116619, SkyD 326935, DJ 178271, DJ 69158, Yachtmaster 169622, GMT 116713LN, GMT 126711.
joli160 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 December 2022, 03:53 PM   #4
EEpro
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
EEpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Real Name: Brad
Location: Purdue
Watch: Daytona
Posts: 9,243
Agree with you on the glidelock. It looks like a metal cuff from the wrist. Functionally it's good but aesthetically it is not for me. Lucky for Rolex they will sell them all regardless of what I think
__________________
Ω
2FA Active
EEpro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 01:20 AM   #5
inadeje
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
inadeje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Miami
Watch: me lose count.
Posts: 5,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by EEpro View Post
Agree with you on the glidelock. It looks like a metal cuff from the wrist. Functionally it's good but aesthetically it is not for me. Lucky for Rolex they will sell them all regardless of what I think
Yes, to a certain extent its what I’m saying
__________________
♛ 218206 Roman ♛ 116689 ♛ 126710BLRO ♛ 16520 white ♛ 16523 white ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1R-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Bronzo 671 & 111, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Cartier Santos XL - Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41
inadeje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 02:03 AM   #6
Devildog
"TRF" Member
 
Devildog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Real Name: Scott
Location: UK
Watch: ^^^ for now
Posts: 5,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by inadeje View Post
While sat looking at my collection and wearing older 5 digit bracelets back-to-back with contemporary 6 digit bracelets I’ve come to the following conclusion.

Rolex possibly went too far with it’s bracelet and clasp designs in an effort to make these, quite frankly, too durable (if that’s possible?)

The 5 digit SEL bracelets with the pressed steel clasps are the most comfortable, well-centered (clasp) and perfectly balanced, combining an ideal weight and feel on the wrist.

The 6 digit bracelets with heavy cast clasps are over-engineered, too industrially perfect and nowhere near as lithe and comfortable as the 5 digit.

Looking at the 6 digit clasps it appears Rolex’s brief was to create an indestructible item that is simply just too, well, solid. The aesthetic appearance has also suffered as these clasps have become bigger and bigger. Huge reinforced cast slab sides, in most cases covering the whole width of lower wrist, even on my 7 3/4. It has grown markedly worse with the latest 21mm bracelets with their clasps looking like an appendage from Marvel’s Iron Man franchise.

Wearing a 5 digit SEL bracelet after wearing a 2022 latest iteration is a huge comfort advantage in favor of the veteran design. The solidity of the 5 digit SEL bracelet is perfectly fine for a few decades of daily use. The pressed steel clasp, while less substantial than the cast variants, is perfectly serviceable and light, taking up just one third of the lower wrist real-estate compared to the newer 21mm clasps. It distinctly seems that Rolex went overkill in it’s plight to make a solid feeling watch.

Making things indestructible can sometimes be both a disadvantage and discomfort. The finesse is gone in today’s iterations. Instead, replaced by overzealous engineering and atomic bomb proof designs that have lost the delicacy of the older bracelets and clasps.

What say other TRF members? Does anyone wear back-to-back contemporary with neo-vintage and not feel Rolex went too far solving a problem that nobody had?
I agree. The "cheap" stamped clasp on my 16600 is 100% fit for purpose. Its effective, low profile, sits well and easy to adjust. The Glidelock on my 126600 was a piece of heavy engineering by comparison

My CHNR Easylink Fliplock clasp is more aesthetically pleasing than both, but still quite a sizeable item, and 5mm of adjustment is too big an increase for me

Best of the lot is the clasp on my BB58. Its the perfect size, has ceramic ball bearings for both the primary friction closure and the secondary flip lock and doesn't therefore have the necessary sprung joint of the modern Rolex clasps. Fix the articulation issue on the 6 o'clock side (as Tudor has done with the T Fit clasp) and it could be brilliant.

It is, in essence, a modernised version of the old style stamped clasps
__________________
Past: 6239 (yes, I know...), 16610, 16600, 116515, 116613LN, 126600, 126711 CHNR

Present: 16600, 116509, Cartier Santos Green.
Devildog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 02:08 AM   #7
tifosi
"TRF" Member
 
tifosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Russ
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 5,760
I literally could not disagree more. I'd never choose a 5 digit clasp over a modern one.

Different strokes for different folks. That's what makes this hobby fun. Something for everyone.
__________________
Russ
tifosi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 05:30 AM   #8
Kap007
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Philadelphia
Watch: 116900
Posts: 323
The clasp on my AK 14000 is horrible. Pops open very easily; even after a bend. I don't trust it. I wear that watch(not often) on a Nato. My 116900 clasp is great. Very comfortable, but no safety. The new AK has the safety. I believe all sport Rolex lines should come with the safety lock.
Kap007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 11:12 AM   #9
inadeje
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
inadeje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Miami
Watch: me lose count.
Posts: 5,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post
I literally could not disagree more. I'd never choose a 5 digit clasp over a modern one.

Different strokes for different folks. That's what makes this hobby fun. Something for everyone.
__________________
♛ 218206 Roman ♛ 116689 ♛ 126710BLRO ♛ 16520 white ♛ 16523 white ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1R-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Bronzo 671 & 111, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Cartier Santos XL - Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41
inadeje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 12:22 PM   #10
Cwillis0001
"TRF" Member
 
Cwillis0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: DC
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 786
The ridiculous clasp was a major factor in getting rid of my 214060. Covered the entire underside of my wrist and frankly wore like a handcuff. That Sub was far and away the most uncomfortable watch I've ever owned.
Cwillis0001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 12:45 PM   #11
Doc Savage
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Doc Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Real Name: Bill
Location: Indiana
Watch: Explorer 214270
Posts: 6,665
Quote:
Originally Posted by inadeje View Post
While sat looking at my collection and wearing older 5 digit bracelets back-to-back with contemporary 6 digit bracelets I’ve come to the following conclusion.

Rolex possibly went too far with it’s bracelet and clasp designs in an effort to make these, quite frankly, too durable (if that’s possible?)

The 5 digit SEL bracelets with the pressed steel clasps are the most comfortable, well-centered (clasp) and perfectly balanced, combining an ideal weight and feel on the wrist.

The 6 digit bracelets with heavy cast clasps are over-engineered, too industrially perfect and nowhere near as lithe and comfortable as the 5 digit.

Looking at the 6 digit clasps it appears Rolex’s brief was to create an indestructible item that is simply just too, well, solid. The aesthetic appearance has also suffered as these clasps have become bigger and bigger. Huge reinforced cast slab sides, in most cases covering the whole width of lower wrist, even on my 7 3/4. It has grown markedly worse with the latest 21mm bracelets with their clasps looking like an appendage from Marvel’s Iron Man franchise.

Wearing a 5 digit SEL bracelet after wearing a 2022 latest iteration is a huge comfort advantage in favor of the veteran design. The solidity of the 5 digit SEL bracelet is perfectly fine for a few decades of daily use. The pressed steel clasp, while less substantial than the cast variants, is perfectly serviceable and light, taking up just one third of the lower wrist real-estate compared to the newer 21mm clasps. It distinctly seems that Rolex went overkill in it’s plight to make a solid feeling watch.

Making things indestructible can sometimes be both a disadvantage and discomfort. The finesse is gone in today’s iterations. Instead, replaced by overzealous engineering and atomic bomb proof designs that have lost the delicacy of the older bracelets and clasps.

What say other TRF members? Does anyone wear back-to-back contemporary with neo-vintage and not feel Rolex went too far solving a problem that nobody had?
Opposite view for me. Rolex DEFINITELY solved a problem I had.

I owned and loved my 5 digit Sub. It was my daily watch for almost 10 years. I sold it about 8 years ago. Once I tried on the Glidelock clasp, I knew I could never go back to the old style bracelet/clasp. The GL is EXACTLY what I want/need in a clasp - easy to adjust on the fly. Sure, it's a thicker clasp, but that's a tradeoff I am happy to make.

Maybe my wrists are weird, but they are constantly expanding/contracting during any given day, based on my activity level, environmental changes, etc. I find myself adjusting the clasp on my 124060 several times a day, every day, for ultimate comfort. It is wonderful to be able to do so.

With the 16610, I had to size it too large just so it wouldn't become way too small for me as my wrist expanded during the day.
__________________
“The real problem of humanity is we have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and godlike technology.”

-Edward O. Wilson
Doc Savage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 12:57 PM   #12
htc8p
"TRF" Member
 
htc8p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Bert
Location: philippines
Watch: 116710 ln
Posts: 3,472
Current Rolex clasps are solid quality but the design is faulty. I have had multiple watches with jamming parts. The flimsy bendy metal sheet causes it. Screws getting stuck in the clasp.

I don’t experience these on the double folding double release clasps


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
htc8p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 12:57 PM   #13
ROlesorusLEX
"TRF" Member
 
ROlesorusLEX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: GA
Watch: 5 Digit
Posts: 652
Far and away for me, the Crownclasp on my DateJust 36 and DayDate 36 are the best clasps in the line. They are unobtrusive and just work. The bracelet is uninterrupted and beautiful. Shame they stopped it on the DJ.

I love my sports watches with the larger clasps (Sub, GMT), but the Crownclasp is a jewel.

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk
ROlesorusLEX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 01:05 PM   #14
Emery
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Aus
Posts: 435
My 14060’s tuna can bracelet has a lot of old-world charm, but my 124270’s bracelet feels better in every way imo.
Emery is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 01:34 PM   #15
samuel019
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
samuel019's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Real Name: Anthony
Location: Triad
Watch: Me go broke!!!!
Posts: 4,038
I like and dislike things from both.

Love the size on a 5 digit better than a 6 digit

Love the sturdiness on a 6 digit better than a 5 digit

Love the ability to make a size adjustment on a 6. Dislike I can’t on a 5 as easy

Love how the crown is on a 6. Dislike how it can polished away on a 5

All of the above is in regards to SS on divers. Subs and SeaDwellers. All other SS models are fine and PM models I have zero issues on 6 digits.
__________________
Rolex Collection: A few here and there. Just ask
samuel019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 03:01 PM   #16
Ketler
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: USA
Posts: 467
The new clasps and bracelets are fine…But I find my 93150 and 93160 much more comfortable.
Ketler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 04:05 PM   #17
inadeje
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
inadeje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Miami
Watch: me lose count.
Posts: 5,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by samuel019 View Post
I like and dislike things from both.

Love the size on a 5 digit better than a 6 digit

Love the sturdiness on a 6 digit better than a 5 digit

Love the ability to make a size adjustment on a 6. Dislike I can’t on a 5 as easy

Love how the crown is on a 6. Dislike how it can polished away on a 5

All of the above is in regards to SS on divers. Subs and SeaDwellers. All other SS models are fine and PM models I have zero issues on 6 digits.
Thanks for the concise analysis and opinions

__________________
♛ 218206 Roman ♛ 116689 ♛ 126710BLRO ♛ 16520 white ♛ 16523 white ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1R-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Bronzo 671 & 111, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Cartier Santos XL - Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41
inadeje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 07:17 PM   #18
AAVDB
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 138
Same here! I just got the newest Sub, and it's even bigger than my other sub that is previous model. (I somehow think the older ceramic wears nicer as well)

But wearing my Tudor BB58 is more easy on the wrist than both submariners. Also my Yachtmaster wears like a dream as well. You are maybe right that they went to far, but mostly on the glidelock.
AAVDB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 09:51 PM   #19
77T
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,017
Rolex Bracelets and Clasps Over The Years

For active sportsfolk the newer bulletproof clasps make sense.

But for daily use the tuna cans are so light and capable. Their only drawback is blade arc and “click tight” are intermarried. But over time one can learn how to resolve any overly loose clasp action.

This one has a great light feeling bracelet.




But then I don this new one and it’s so heavily shod…




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 11:03 PM   #20
Newt
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2022
Location: Bumpkin, USA
Watch: 1971 GMT Pepsi
Posts: 172
I'm with the "new bracelet" crowd. I really love the new machined leaves, and the way the clasp itself isn't as sharp and sits a bit off the wrist. The old ones always seemed to almost feel like they were cutting into me as my wrist expanded. I tried adding easylink to an older clasp, and it helps, but I've also purchased 3 modern bracelets for 5-digit watches(which I largely prefer to 6 digit sports models).
Newt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 December 2022, 11:19 PM   #21
tifosi
"TRF" Member
 
tifosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Real Name: Russ
Location: Southern NJ
Posts: 5,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwillis0001 View Post
The ridiculous clasp was a major factor in getting rid of my 214060. Covered the entire underside of my wrist and frankly wore like a handcuff. That Sub was far and away the most uncomfortable watch I've ever owned.
So crazy how opinions differ from person to person. The 124060 is probably the most comfortable Sub I've ever owned.
__________________
Russ
tifosi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 01:03 AM   #22
OG1982
2024 Pledge Member
 
OG1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2020
Real Name: Ollie
Location: UK
Watch: Sub41 OP36 & DJ36
Posts: 2,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwillis0001 View Post
The ridiculous clasp was a major factor in getting rid of my 214060. Covered the entire underside of my wrist and frankly wore like a handcuff. That Sub was far and away the most uncomfortable watch I've ever owned.
May I ask, how big are your wrists?
OG1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 01:25 AM   #23
brandrea
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 78,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by samuel019 View Post
I like and dislike things from both.

Love the size on a 5 digit better than a 6 digit

Love the sturdiness on a 6 digit better than a 5 digit

Love the ability to make a size adjustment on a 6. Dislike I can’t on a 5 as easy

Love how the crown is on a 6. Dislike how it can polished away on a 5

All of the above is in regards to SS on divers. Subs and SeaDwellers. All other SS models are fine and PM models I have zero issues on 6 digits.
I’m exactly the same Anthony

I’ll add that as my watch journey moves along, comfort on the wrist takes over most. There’s no denying (for me) that the 5 digits have that over their modern counterparts.

That’s not to say I can’t find a comfortable fit with the 6 digits, but overall I’d say the 5 digits were better in that regard, in part due to being lighter overall. YMMV
brandrea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 01:32 AM   #24
inadeje
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
inadeje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Miami
Watch: me lose count.
Posts: 5,907
Since it appears I’m not emphasizing my point perhaps an image can replace a thousand words?



__________________
♛ 218206 Roman ♛ 116689 ♛ 126710BLRO ♛ 16520 white ♛ 16523 white ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1R-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Bronzo 671 & 111, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Cartier Santos XL - Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41
inadeje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 01:33 AM   #25
worldofoyster
"TRF" Member
 
worldofoyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Real Name: Vincent
Location: 215
Watch: SS Sub
Posts: 2,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by joli160 View Post
The glidelock I must admit is an abomination, just weird how big it wears and the clumsy adjustment requiring to remove the watch from the wrist.
It’s the one thing I don’t like about my Submariner.
Than again the DSSD style clasp fits well, because that watch is already totally over engineered and such a clasp does not look out of place on that particular watch.

I do prefer the Oysterlock clasps compared to the old style 5 digits style.
The easy link that comes with it works like a charm and the machined steel feels good. Sourced a modern DJ clasp for my 16622 and feel that this upgraded the wearing experience.

My favourite clasp
i think i am the opposite. i actually like the glidelock and it allows more adjustments when needed.
worldofoyster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 03:34 AM   #26
Cwillis0001
"TRF" Member
 
Cwillis0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: DC
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie1982 View Post
May I ask, how big are your wrists?
About 6.5 inches or 16.5 cm. It's one of the reasons I pay close attention to Tim Mosso's reviews as we have roughly the same wrist size lol.
Cwillis0001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 03:36 AM   #27
Cwillis0001
"TRF" Member
 
Cwillis0001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: DC
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 786
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post
So crazy how opinions differ from person to person. The 124060 is probably the most comfortable Sub I've ever owned.
It is kind of interesting. I also used to have this giant Planet Ocean, and for whatever reason it was comfortable as hell. It's almost bizarre how a mere 41mm Sub was so uncomfortable on my wrist. Oh well, good thing there's an a$$ for every seat.
Cwillis0001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 03:59 AM   #28
Boopie
"TRF" Member
 
Boopie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Beverly Hills, CA
Watch: Yachtmaster
Posts: 3,952
I am definitely not a fan of the clasp on my 5-digit Datejust.
Boopie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 04:14 AM   #29
Meyrin
"TRF" Member
 
Meyrin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Real Name: Ian
Location: Hamburg
Watch: Sub 14060
Posts: 1,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by inadeje View Post
Since it appears I’m not emphasizing my point perhaps an image can replace a thousand words?



Oh yes, a picture can indeed sometimes say more than a thousand words! I love the bracelet and clasp on my old 14060 Submariner, and I´ve had no problems with it after wearing the watch nearly every day for 27 years. It´s extremely comfortable. But to be fair, I´ve not yet had the chance to try the new 6-digit bracelets...
Meyrin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 December 2022, 06:55 AM   #30
Ferdelious
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Ferdelious's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Real Name: Matt
Location: Tampa, FL
Watch: Hulk/SD4K/SeaQ/P39
Posts: 3,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post
I literally could not disagree more. I'd never choose a 5 digit clasp over a modern one.

Different strokes for different folks. That's what makes this hobby fun. Something for everyone.
I'm in your camp.
__________________
Why is it, "A penny for your thoughts," but, "you have to put your two cents in?" Somebody's making a penny.
Ferdelious is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches

OCWatches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.