My Issues with 12 Series Subs

[DoctorSpazz]

I’ll be the first to applaud Rolex for reducing the thickness of the lugs, but am I the only one who is having a hard time, trying to understand why the clasp increased in size significantly?

Additionally, perhaps my eye is drawn to smaller lug widths, but the end link just looks so much beefier for only having a 1 mm increase in size.

Am I the only one who sees these changes as so obvious and off putting ? Perhaps more wrist time is needed…

[slide13]

The clasp got slightly wider. It didn't get any longer. It's a tiny difference from the 11 series IMO.

Now, I wouldn't have minded a stronger taper either, but I do feel the current version has a very nice balance to it, both in feel and aesthetics.

I owned an 114060 in the past and didn't care for it because of it's proportions with regards to the case. Now wearing a 126610 and absolutely love it, fixed all my problems with the 11 series.

Now if only they'd bring back case chamfers and lug holes.....one can dream :)

[DoctorSpazz]

Originally Posted by slide13

The clasp got slightly wider. It didn't get any longer. It's a tiny difference from the 11 series IMO.

Now, I wouldn't have minded a stronger taper either, but I do feel the current version has a very nice balance to it, both in feel and aesthetics.

I owned an 114060 in the past and didn't care for it because of it's proportions with regards to the case. Now wearing a 126610 and absolutely love it, fixed all my problems with the 11 series.

Now if only they'd bring back case chamfers and lug holes.....one can dream :)

Is the clasp length the exact same as the 11 series are you sure about that?

Perhaps it’s because I’m enjoying the polar Explorer II, which I believe also has a 21 mm lug width, but the clasp is just so much smaller and feels so much better on the wrist.

I obviously understand that the submariner clasp needs to be longer to allow for the dive extension, but it just feels so wide and long ……that’s what she said ….

[Nads786]

Originally Posted by DoctorSpazz

Is the clasp length the exact same as the 11 series are you sure about that?

Perhaps it’s because I’m enjoying the polar Explorer II, which I believe also has a 21 mm lug width, but the clasp is just so much smaller and feels so much better on the wrist.

I obviously understand that the submariner clasp needs to be longer to allow for the dive extension, but it just feels so wide and long ……that’s what she said ….

I agree with you OP. I got rid of my Sub for a GMT and the first thing I noticed was how much more comfortable the easy link extension was vs. glide lock.

[Giovannibravo]

I agree with everything said. I love chamfers too. My one question is, do watch brand feels chamfers were only done due to cut cost on the case finishing and manufacturing?

[Henrimontgomery]

Originally Posted by slide13

The clasp got slightly wider. It didn't get any longer. It's a tiny difference from the 11 series IMO.

Now, I wouldn't have minded a stronger taper either, but I do feel the current version has a very nice balance to it, both in feel and aesthetics.

I owned an 114060 in the past and didn't care for it because of it's proportions with regards to the case. Now wearing a 126610 and absolutely love it, fixed all my problems with the 11 series.

Now if only they'd bring back case chamfers and lug holes.....one can dream :)

Agreed with the taper. I wish it was more tight at the end, like the 11 series. This one feels more like the other brands taper which seems like they couldn’t commit to straight or taper and went midway.

My real issue with 12x and ceramic subs in general is the back case, which makes the watch float above the wrist. My 126710GRNR doesn’t do that and sits way more flush on the wrist. Because of how similar they can look, I’m thinking about letting the sub go.

[herts9]

Different strokes. I tried on a 126610 and didn't care for it. I'm more of a fan of the 11 series and its lugs, clasp and proportions. It's the longest I've owned any Rolex, so that must mean something!

[DoctorSpazz]

Originally Posted by herts9

Different strokes. I tried on a 126610 and didn't care for it. I'm more of a fan of the 11 series and its lugs, clasp and proportions. It's the longest I've owned any Rolex, so that must mean something!

I like the 11 series as well because I believe it has the exact same case proportions as the GMT’s which are obviously fan favorites among community.

I guess in my mind, the ideal combination would’ve been slimmer lugs, 20 mm width on the lug spacing and a smaller clasp

[slide13]

Yep, clasp length is the same and it's about 1mm wider...maybe a tick over 1mm.

Having owned both the added width doesn't bother me at all but it's noticeable. I think visually it actually makes the clasp look/seem shorter when wearing it only because the other one being the same length but narrower had a very long and slim appearance. The current one looks better balanced to my eye.

11 series Sub and GMT are not the same case, GMT was always a bit slimmer in the lugs. It was very subtle...very very subtle, but there. I never minded the 11 series GMTs but GMT isn't my thing. The 11 series sub was always just that little bit off to my eye, never loved it on the wrist when I had it. But there are definitely people who prefer that broad shouldered boxy look, it definitely has a more modern feel to it.

[DoctorSpazz]

Originally Posted by slide13

Yep, clasp length is the same and it's about 1mm wider...maybe a tick over 1mm.

Having owned both the added width doesn't bother me at all but it's noticeable. I think visually it actually makes the clasp look/seem shorter when wearing it only because the other one being the same length but narrower had a very long and slim appearance. The current one looks better balanced to my eye.

11 series Sub and GMT are not the same case, GMT was always a bit slimmer in the lugs. It was very subtle...very very subtle, but there. I never minded the 11 series GMTs but GMT isn't my thing. The 11 series sub was always just that little bit off to my eye, never loved it on the wrist when I had it. But there are definitely people who prefer that broad shouldered boxy look, it definitely has a more modern feel to it.

Are there any websites that provide side-by-side measurements?

[123Blueface]

Same length clasp. Just gives appearance of larger due to slightly wider.

[eightball76]

does anyone have any issues with the shoulder sharpness?

[MichelleP]

I had the same issue with the clasp. I have a smaller wrist and had no issue with the 11 series but the 12 clasp was too wide.

[DoctorSpazz]

Originally Posted by MichelleP

I had the same issue with the clasp. I have a smaller wrist and had no issue with the 11 series but the 12 clasp was too wide.

Is it really the same length though as the 11 series?

[MichelleP]

Originally Posted by DoctorSpazz

Is it really the same length though as the 11 series?

I believe so but the width made it less comfortable on my wrist. I don't understand why Rolex needs to make their glide lock clasps so large. GO has an on the fly clasp and it is much smaller

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by DoctorSpazz

Is it really the same length though as the 11 series?

Yep




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DoctorSpazz]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Yep




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow that 1mm width does a number


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[train-time]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Yep




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks Brian! Can't dispute the evidence. Now I need to whine at my AD to deliver me a 12 series and call it a day!

[swils8610]

I was never a fan of the 11 series subs. The maxi case looked off to me. I had a few and sold them. The 12 series is much better IMHO due to the slimmer lugs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[slus]

I like the wider bracelet and clasp of the 12 series, couldn't stand the fat lugs and skinny bracelet of the 11 series, shortest time I ever owned a watch was my 116610LN

[SubDate]

Originally Posted by slus

I like the wider bracelet and clasp of the 12 series, couldn't stand the fat lugs and skinny bracelet of the 11 series, shortest time I ever owned a watch was my 116610LN

Exact same for me. I tried on a Sub 41 and GMT. I really disliked the way the bracelet on the GMT just “ends” visually into the case. Not graceful at all. Sub has a beautiful transition. That and I hate PCLs, they look very cheap and tacky to me, like it is trying too hard to scream luxury. Loved the brushed Sub bracelet, so chose it and never looked back.

[Roddypeepa]

Christ, the moaning on here…!

Before the 12 series was realised the 11 had a lot of fans and a lot of detractors. To me, there’s not really a whole lot of difference, let’s be real here!

Previously the 11 series clasp and bracelet were “perfection” for a lot. Now, the case is perfect on the 12, harking back to 5 digits and the case leaves a lot to be desired. Despite being tweaked.

So now we are saying “perfect” is 11 series clasp and bracelet, 12 series case?

Don’t even get me started on the movement! 32 or 31 series? It’s been done to death already…

Tastes change. We are splitting hairs here. Perhaps Rolex knows all this and since materials science is where it is, the only improvements left without going back to plan are tiny differences in dimensions..? To each their own…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by Roddypeepa

harking back to 5 digits and the case leaves a lot to be desired.

The 16610 case was fine, the bracelet and clasp were rubbish.

It's not moaning, it's a discussion of differences of opinion and perception.

My perfection point is the 116610LV. I don't particularly like the 1 series or the 12 series. I don't care or judge others by what they like, dislike, choose to spend their money on, or their willingness to discuss it in a discussion forum.

[train-time]

I have owned several 116610 series over the 10 years it was produced and 2 of the 126610 series and like the overall looks of the 12 series over the 11 series, but didn't like the clasp. From what I have read, it was only 1 mm wider but it was way longer than the many 11 series that I owned. The clasp on the 12 spanned the width of my 7" wrist and the 11 didn't and was the most comfortable fit of the two. I even considered going back to the 11 because of the clasp length on the 12, but couldn't get past the wide lugs on the 11.

[slide13]

Originally Posted by train-time

I have owned several 116610 series over the 10 years it was produced and 2 of the 126610 series and like the overall looks of the 12 series over the 11 series, but didn't like the clasp. From what I have read, it was only 1 mm wider but it was way longer than the many 11 series that I owned. The clasp on the 12 spanned the width of my 7" wrist and the 11 didn't and was the most comfortable fit of the two. I even considered going back to the 11 because of the clasp length on the 12, but couldn't get past the wide lugs on the 11.

Unless you were comparing a 12 Sub to a 11 GMT or other watch with a non-Glidelock clasp you're imagining things with regards to clasp length.

Here is a good video that shows them side by side:
https://youtu.be/3t1IbDivTsw?si=1IOilTB5uTAXsp_i&t=487

Now in it he says the 11 series is actually longer than the 12 series, but I believe that's incorrect and it just appears longer because of that narrower design. Side by side they look identical and I've seen photos with them lined up right next to each other and they were the same length (unfortunately I'm unable to find that now)

Now, you can not like the clasp anyway, it's definitely wider and while it's only 1mm it's definitely a noticeable 1mm. I like it just fine and might even prefer it because I do think it looks better visually not being quite so skinny for it's length.

I just wish people would stop saying it's longer when it just factually isn't. Because then it gets repeated and repeated and it's just not true.

[train-time]

Well, if the 12 series is shorter as the video says, which I don't buy, then I am a customer for another 12 series....

[Hollie_Rollie]

I’m not the biggest fan of the 41mm case size. Hopefully they don’t bring the GMTs to 41mm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jamesgames]

Originally Posted by Hollie_Rollie

I’m not the biggest fan of the 41mm case size. Hopefully they don’t bring the GMTs to 41mm


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The lug to lug on the case between the GMT 126710 and the 41 Sub is the same basically. The 40 vs 41 measurement is actually 40.3 for the GMT so it gets rounded down to a 40mm, and the 41mm measurement on the sub is actually 40.6mm and rounded up to 41mm.

Basically the difference is very small.

[Hollie_Rollie]

Originally Posted by jamesgames

The lug to lug on the case between the GMT 126710 and the 41 Sub is the same basically. The 40 vs 41 measurement is actually 40.3 for the GMT so it gets rounded down to a 40mm, and the 41mm measurement on the sub is actually 40.6mm and rounded up to 41mm.

Basically the difference is very small.

Dang James you had time to type all that out? You could’ve just said “The difference is very small” and I would’ve believed you.

But ugh , thanks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jamesgames]

Originally Posted by Hollie_Rollie

Dang James you had time to type all that out? You could’ve just said “The difference is very small” and I would’ve believed you.

But ugh , thanks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Last I checked this was a discussion forum.

You couldve just moved on instead of wasted a post as well.

But ugh, thanks?