Drilled or newer case lugs: spring bar retention

[SOG DIVER]

This is a Rolex tech research question for which I have not found an
answer to date. Perhaps close-up comparison photographs would help
of the drilled vs "non-drilled" non-visible lug treatment areas of older vs newer watches.

Which version or treatment of the lugs tends to provide more spring bar
retention? Drilled or "non-drilled" lugs. Or, are they pretty much the same.

I use NATO bands periodically on my Submariners for actual diving or
in rough water boating or sailing. I tend to prefer the earlier drilled lugs
for easier band to bracelet change-outs. The NATO bands provide
an extra level of watch/band retention security, first used by the UK Royal Navy, or MoD Ministry of Defense,
which includes the Royal Marines. Their 5517 Submariner featured soldered permanent spring bars.

There have been some earlier discussions of spring bars/NATO bands/drilled-non-drilled lugs on the forum, but
not any detailed coverage or photographs that I have found.


It would really be helpful to see the case lug underside attachment photos showing just how the newer spring bar design
attachment works with newer watch non-shoulder/shouldered spring bars. Perhaps our more
knowledgeable horology folks could assist. Or alternatively, Rolex may
have provided limited detail photos in their literature.

This inquiry is not meant to discuss or establish preferences between older or newer Rolex reference models,
but just to inquire into more detail as to case lug design treatment.

Many thanks-in advance.

[SOG DIVER]

Photographs found. The retention question is not moot, but appears to be subjective.
The one area that appears to be in favor of earlier drilled lug references is that
of band/bracelet switch outs.

Until convinced, a NATO Crown and Buckle band stays affixed to my Submariners.