A different breed of watch owner?

[Zsprings]

Years ago, Rolex watches were mostly bought as what is now called a 'tool' watch and those we now see coming up for sale usually have bracelet stretch.

Many of us move on to pm watches and as gold is softer than ss, is it not time for Oyster bracelets on new Rolex watches to have a removable screw at each link (rather than just the additional links). With a removable screw at each link, the bracelet could be reconditioned by the watch owner by purchasing new screws? This way the Rolex with Oyster bracelet could worn all the time, but then brought back into tight condition every now and again with new screws, to appear as when bought?
Even better, the new style bracelet screw (threaded at slot end) complete with an additional sleeve, could have new sleeves fitted?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Zsprings

Years ago, Rolex watches were mostly bought as what is now called a 'tool' watch and those we now see coming up for sale usually have bracelet stretch.

Many of us move on to pm watches and as gold is softer than ss, is it not time for Oyster bracelets on new Rolex watches to have a removable screw at each link (rather than just the additional links). With a removable screw at each link, the bracelet could be reconditioned by the watch owner by purchasing new screws? This way the Rolex with Oyster bracelet could worn all the time, but then brought back into tight condition every now and again with new screws, to appear as when bought?
Even better, the new style bracelet screw (threaded at slot end) complete with an additional sleeve, could have new sleeves fitted?

Well speaking for myself used a late 1990s 16600 SD for many years underwater as a real working tool. And been serviced by 3 different RSC world wide yet show very little wear in bracelet what some call stretch and over 20 years old. Simple answer keep them clean and wear a snug fit and the oyster bracelet will in most cases outlast there owners. And what happens if not kept clean the dirt trapped between links and pins acts like sandpaper and elongates the screw holes. But with todays mainly pampered watches this should not happen no matter the watch if kept clean and regular service.

[Zsprings]

[QUOTE=padi56;11676994] But with todays mainly pampered watches this should not happen no matter the watch if kept clean and regular service.

At least my thread heading was right in a way?

But, as bracelets can be sent away to be made tight again, it baffles me how the links can be parted? Clearly the non screw links are pushed together at initial stage of manufacture, but no matter how I articulate the links, there is no visible edge of any link to allow a tool to pull the links apart? Clearly, bracelets with elongated link holes are drilled out and larger dia pins put in place, but how to get the bracelet apart in the first place ?

[GradyPhilpott]

Peter's right.

Keep your bracelets clean and the so-called stretch will not be a problem

What you suggest, and I'm not quite sure what you are suggesting, would probably incrase the cost of the watch more than having a bracelet refurbished every twenty years.

[brandrea]

I’m confused by this thread …

I’ll just wear the heck out of my watches and rinse them off once a week

[Mendota]

I would also counter that out of the millions of watches produced over the last 70 years, hardly any were actually used as tool watches. Most of the product lines were and are still dress and casual. Only the professional lines were "tools" and even then I bet most were just purchased and worn for dress and casual wear.

Stretch doesn't come from "working" with the watch on. In fact, using it as a "tool" and having the bracelet properly fitting won't result in any stretch. Stretch comes from improper fit combined with years of neglect to clean the bracelet. Therefore, I submit that most cases of stretch are probably seen in the dressy and casual crowd. Actual workers using it as a tool are going to have it fit properly.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

[77T]

Originally Posted by Zsprings

…is it not time for Oyster bracelets on new Rolex watches to have a removable screw at each link (rather than just the additional links). With a removable screw at each link, the bracelet could be reconditioned by the watch owner by purchasing new screws?

What do you have against watchmakers?

I’m really just kidding you there…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Avs Fan]

i'm not sure what a "proper fit" is, but I prefer my bracelets to be slightly loose, otherwise I feel claustophobic/constrained.

[sj24k]

I THINK I understand the point that’s trying to be made here? but honestly I wear my modern Rolex watches, including my PM watches all the time, never baby them, and have never had any issues with my bracelets beyond sometimes having to make easy micro adjustments or needing to rinse with a little warm water and dish soap. Not sure I would make any changes whatsoever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rafeeq]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Peter's right.

What you suggest...would probably incrase the cost of the watch more than having a bracelet refurbished every twenty years.

Ah, excellent point, Grady. According to the late science fiction writer Robert A. Heinlein, the answer to almost any question beginning "Why don't they..." is $$$$$.

[Polar Bear]

I hate to break this to you, but even the highest quality and best made tool wears out after enough time and use

If you wear it, it is going to "wear"

[Mendota]

Originally Posted by Avs Fan

i'm not sure what a "proper fit" is, but I prefer my bracelets to be slightly loose, otherwise I feel claustophobic/constrained.

You are fine.

Wearing it dangling and flopping around your wrist like a tennis bracelet = improper fit and way more wear and tear on the links.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Mendota

You are fine.



Wearing it dangling and flopping around your wrist like a tennis bracelet = improper fit and way more wear and tear on the links.

Nonsense.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

[Mendota]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Nonsense.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

Why? Literally every single thread I have read on here for the last 12 years has said that wearing the watch band loose, so that the watch head goes down against your wrist, puts pressure on the links, and then when they are dirty inside (combined with that pressure) it causes stretch. It's literally the recipe for bracelet stretch. Is that not accurate?

[HiBoost]

Originally Posted by Mendota

Why? Literally every single thread I have read on here for the last 12 years has said that wearing the watch band loose, so that the watch head goes down against your wrist, puts pressure on the links, and then when they are dirty inside (combined with that pressure) it causes stretch. It's literally the recipe for bracelet stretch. Is that not accurate?

It's not the extra "pressure" of sliding down the wrist. It's all the extra articulation of the links. If your bracelet is sloppy loose then every joint will be rotating through more degrees each day, exacerbating any wear caused by dirt in said joints. A "tight" fit is more or less a non-moving fit and that cuts down on wear caused by movement, not pressure. Again, these things aren't made out of taffy. Your wrist is not a hydraulic press. It's the fine "sanding" action of tens of thousands of small movements over the years that causes the wear.

OP - Your desire for a fully serviceable bracelet isn't a bad one, but don't presume it's only the screws that are wearing. The links would wear away at the same or possibly even greater rate.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Mendota

Why? Literally every single thread I have read on here for the last 12 years has said that wearing the watch band loose, so that the watch head goes down against your wrist, puts pressure on the links, and then when they are dirty inside (combined with that pressure) it causes stretch. It's literally the recipe for bracelet stretch. Is that not accurate?

I wear my watches loose and there's no evidence of excessive wear. Keeping the watch clean is the best course, regardless of how it's worn.

I'm not buying a multi-thousand dollar watch and then wearing it in a manner that is uncomfortable, just prevent a little wear.

I won't live long enough to wear out any of my bracelets and if I do, there are remedies.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

[Mendota]

Originally Posted by HiBoost

It's not the extra "pressure" of sliding down the wrist. It's all the extra articulation of the links. If your bracelet is sloppy loose then every joint will be rotating through more degrees each day, exacerbating any wear caused by dirt in said joints. A "tight" fit is more or less a non-moving fit and that cuts down on wear caused by movement, not pressure. Again, these things aren't made out of taffy. Your wrist is not a hydraulic press. It's the fine "sanding" action of tens of thousands of small movements over the years that causes the wear.

OP - Your desire for a fully serviceable bracelet isn't a bad one, but don't presume it's only the screws that are wearing. The links would wear away at the same or possibly even greater rate.

Correct. I fully know it's not the act of sliding and sorry if that's the impression I gave. It's the pressure, release, pressure, release, thousands of times a day with micro grit and debris in between the metal surfaces causing metal on metal wear.

[Mendota]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I wear my watches loose and there's no evidence of excessive wear. Keeping the watch clean is the best course, regardless of how it's worn.

I'm not buying a multi-thousand dollar watch and then wearing it in a manner that is uncomfortable, just prevent a little wear.

I won't live long enough to wear out any of my bracelets and if I do, there are remedies.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

You do you my friend and just enjoy life! I don't think any of us need to even concern ourselves with this menial stuff. Life's too short!

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Mendota

You do you my friend and just enjoy life! I don't think any of us need to even concern ourselves with this menial stuff. Life's too short!

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by Zsprings

Years ago, Rolex watches were mostly bought as what is now called a 'tool' watch and those we now see coming up for sale usually have bracelet stretch.

Many of us move on to pm watches and as gold is softer than ss, is it not time for Oyster bracelets on new Rolex watches to have a removable screw at each link (rather than just the additional links). With a removable screw at each link, the bracelet could be reconditioned by the watch owner by purchasing new screws? This way the Rolex with Oyster bracelet could worn all the time, but then brought back into tight condition every now and again with new screws, to appear as when bought?
Even better, the new style bracelet screw (threaded at slot end) complete with an additional sleeve, could have new sleeves fitted?

Years ago, hollow links on bracelets.
Those stretch.

As for "most" buyers "years ago" buying Rolex as tool watches, not so sure.
Relatives and friends buying Rolexes 30-40 years ago were buying them (steel, 2-tone, PM) for pretty much the same reasons they're buying them today, which is definitely not as tool watches.

[Zsprings]

[QUOTE=eonflux;11681139]Years ago, hollow links on bracelets.
Those stretch.

They were hollow, that's certain, but the links were made of folded thin sheet s/steel with a spring inside each link. They didn't stretch, the non stainless steel spring usually broke and thereby no longer kept the links together.
Rolex continually improve the bracelets and now some of the spare links have a sleeve (maybe ceramic or perhaps plastic). I see this as an attempt to overcome wear betwen bracelet screw and solid link.

Just seems sensible to me to construct new bracelets with a screw at each articulation of the bracelet?