ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

dysondiver · 28 August 2010, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daddybear

I don't think the see-through case back could withstand the pressure of diving. I could be wrong...

For a dress watch though...meh....

-db

the see through bit on the front does ok

oops , beaten to it ,, why add another seal if its not really needed , just another failure point , as mentioned , ok if its a dress watch , not needed otherwise

Andad · 28 August 2010, 08:15 PM

I don't think I will paddle below 100m with my GMT.

Texican · 28 August 2010, 08:32 PM

Rolex should stay with solid casebacks, it's tradition after all, and IMO it looks cheap.

Rolesor · 28 August 2010, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakuraba

Welcome.

If Rolex were to make one, I have faith in our beloved brand to over-engineer it.

x2 :)

buke45 · 28 August 2010, 10:56 PM

I would welcome it

Frogman4me · 28 August 2010, 11:01 PM

Well I don't think rolex movements are anything to marvel at as I am sure this is so because they are designed to be durable and reliable. If they chose to do the exhibition case back then I am sure they will make it more interesting to look at...but I doubt they would ever do this.

Route 66 · 28 August 2010, 11:07 PM

I'd welcome it...on one condition; as long as the case back stayed as flat as it is now. If it had to be domed in any way for strength, I'd reject it because I don't want the watch standing up any higher on my wrist.

Andad · 28 August 2010, 11:15 PM

Hi Steve,

The thickness of the Rolex sports range vary quite a lot.
The difference would hardly be visible.
I doubt if I could tell the difference between some models of varying thicknesses in a 'blind' test based on 'feel'.

Except for the DSSD I can't pick the difference between the models.

Paracentesis · 28 August 2010, 11:23 PM

Welcome. It might concentrate their minds on finishing the movements, and avoid another "Walt Odets moment".

Evan614 · 29 August 2010, 12:15 AM

How does the metal back opposed to the glass back feel on the skin?

Submarino · 29 August 2010, 12:19 AM

I wouldn't like exhibition case backs. A Rolex is a sturdy and enduring timepiece. Adding a sapphire crystal on the back would take that attribute away.

Paracentesis · 29 August 2010, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evan614

How does the metal back opposed to the glass back feel on the skin?

No difference.

antivenin · 29 August 2010, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Welcome Welcome Welcome!!!!

Do you work for Rolex?

I do not work for Rolex, I wish I did, maybe I could get my first one faster!

Cato · 29 August 2010, 08:47 AM

Oppose: why mess with perfection?

WARVET · 29 August 2010, 08:48 AM

I think I would not buy it, there are already enough watches with that

The GMT Master · 29 August 2010, 08:55 AM

I'd welcome it, with the caveat that they improved the decoration. As it stands, Rolex's movements are designed to perform a function, looks aren't taken into account, with the notable exception of the Prince's gorgeous manual wind movement

slcbbrown · 30 August 2010, 12:00 PM

Don't care either way-- appearance wise. However, I would really care if my Rolex was less robust because of a see through back. I wouldn't want to give up any toughness.

BarkMaster · 30 August 2010, 12:04 PM

Welcome the option.

sturgeon123456 · 30 August 2010, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directioneng

Years ago Rolex made a clear caseback for a GMT.

I like them.

I really like Rolex, but the watch looks better with the solid case back in my opinion. There really isn't much to see back there.

520Matt · 30 August 2010, 02:14 PM

Oppose, I like the solid case back

28 August 2010, 08:15 PM	#32
Andad 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Eddie Location: Australia Watch: A few. Posts: 37,526	I don't think I will paddle below 100m with my GMT. __________________ E

28 August 2010, 08:32 PM	#33
Texican "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Real Name: Scotty Location: Texas Watch: 1680 Red, 5512 Posts: 230	Rolex should stay with solid casebacks, it's tradition after all, and IMO it looks cheap. __________________

28 August 2010, 11:15 PM	#38
Andad 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Real Name: Eddie Location: Australia Watch: A few. Posts: 37,526	Hi Steve, The thickness of the Rolex sports range vary quite a lot. The difference would hardly be visible. I doubt if I could tell the difference between some models of varying thicknesses in a 'blind' test based on 'feel'. Except for the DSSD I can't pick the difference between the models. __________________ E

29 August 2010, 12:15 AM	#40
Evan614 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Buckeye Nation Watch: out 4 Panerai bug Posts: 414	How does the metal back opposed to the glass back feel on the skin? __________________ #1 Two-Tone Yachtmaster, Blue -Z series #2 White Daytona SS - Z series #3 PAM 88 M Future dissolution of monetary funds will be for a Panerai 212

29 August 2010, 12:19 AM	#41
Submarino "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: Mr. H Location: Dallas Watch: them for me! Posts: 7,180	I wouldn't like exhibition case backs. A Rolex is a sturdy and enduring timepiece. Adding a sapphire crystal on the back would take that attribute away. __________________ WATCHES ARE THE NEW CURRENCY!/ MEMBER 27491/OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED OLD TIMER /AP OWNERS CLUB MEMBER Instagram @watchcollectinglifestyle

28 August 2010, 10:56 PM	#35
buke45 Banned Join Date: Jun 2010 Real Name: Juan Location: Ponce, PR Watch: Your Butt Posts: 1,464	I would welcome it

28 August 2010, 11:01 PM	#36
Frogman4me Banned Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Maryland Posts: 6,268	Well I don't think rolex movements are anything to marvel at as I am sure this is so because they are designed to be durable and reliable. If they chose to do the exhibition case back then I am sure they will make it more interesting to look at...but I doubt they would ever do this.

28 August 2010, 11:07 PM	#37
Route 66 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Real Name: Steve Location: Burbank, CA Watch: 214270 Mark II Posts: 4,121	I'd welcome it...on one condition; as long as the case back stayed as flat as it is now. If it had to be domed in any way for strength, I'd reject it because I don't want the watch standing up any higher on my wrist.

28 August 2010, 11:23 PM	#39
Paracentesis Banned Join Date: May 2010 Real Name: James Location: UK Watch: Tissot Posts: 1,454	Welcome. It might concentrate their minds on finishing the movements, and avoid another "Walt Odets moment".

29 August 2010, 08:47 AM	#44
Cato Banned Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Land of the Lost Watch: 116610LN Posts: 2,201	Oppose: why mess with perfection?

29 August 2010, 08:48 AM	#45
WARVET "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Real Name: Vincent Location: Louisiana Watch: 16710 Coke Posts: 448	I think I would not buy it, there are already enough watches with that

29 August 2010, 08:55 AM	#46
The GMT Master "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Chris Location: England Posts: 8,150	I'd welcome it, with the caveat that they improved the decoration. As it stands, Rolex's movements are designed to perform a function, looks aren't taken into account, with the notable exception of the Prince's gorgeous manual wind movement

30 August 2010, 12:00 PM	#47
slcbbrown "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2009 Real Name: steve Location: dallas area Watch: 50's TT t-bird Posts: 3,689	Don't care either way-- appearance wise. However, I would really care if my Rolex was less robust because of a see through back. I wouldn't want to give up any toughness.

30 August 2010, 12:04 PM	#48
BarkMaster "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Texas Watch: 18078 YG DD Posts: 7,962	Welcome the option. __________________ BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK

30 August 2010, 02:14 PM	#50
520Matt "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Matt Location: Tucson, AZ Watch: SD, LV,GMT II Pep Posts: 2,782	Oppose, I like the solid case back

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