Yet another DD I vs DD II thread? Yes!

[JustABreathAway]

Otto, very nice write-up. Did you change your dial to champagne sticks? Or are these merely photos from a previous AD visit to compare and contrast the I & II?

As you've said, these watches really need to be seen in person and on wrist to appreciate the differences between them. I also think several wearings with time in between each trial is important. It's certainly personal preference between the two, but images just can't capture how vastly different they are. The DDII's dial is ENORMOUS compared to the I, and the bezel is substantially more noticeable and attention-getting on the II. Once you get used to the I or the II, it does simply become 'the DD' to you. However, they really are quite different to behold, and to wear, given the weight differences.

I love, LOVE my DDII and wouldn't chose anything else as my Rolex. Also, I don't think the Gold, Gold, Gold of the YG Champagne Romans is monochromatic at all in real life. The exterior of the watch glimmers as if a thousand suns are dancing within the metal, the champagne dial has a sunburst pattern that gives the appearance of millions of textured lines emanating from the center of the watch, and the gold Romans refract and reflect light in a wonderful display. It is truly a fantastic horological reference.

As gwozhog points out, both time pieces are excellent, solid gold pieces that are wonderful to own and wear. It's truly a matter of personal preference - no single correct answer.

Cheers!

[marcst1973]

Side by side the DD2 looks out of proportion, but on the wrist looks great. Either way, great watches!!

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

[Otto]

Originally Posted by JustABreathAway

Otto, very nice write-up. Did you change your dial to champagne sticks? Or are these merely photos from a previous AD visit to compare and contrast the I & II?

As you've said, these watches really need to be seen in person and on wrist to appreciate the differences between them. I also think several wearings with time in between each trial is important. It's certainly personal preference between the two, but images just can't capture how vastly different they are. The DDII's dial is ENORMOUS compared to the I, and the bezel is substantially more noticeable and attention-getting on the II. Once you get used to the I or the II, it does simply become 'the DD' to you. However, they really are quite different to behold, and to wear, given the weight differences.

I love, LOVE my DDII and wouldn't chose anything else as my Rolex. Also, I don't think the Gold, Gold, Gold of the YG Champagne Romans is monochromatic at all in real life. The exterior of the watch glimmers as if a thousand suns are dancing within the metal, the champagne dial has a sunburst pattern that gives the appearance of millions of textured lines emanating from the center of the watch, and the gold Romans refract and reflect light in a wonderful display. It is truly a fantastic horological reference.

As gwozhog points out, both time pieces are excellent, solid gold pieces that are wonderful to own and wear. It's truly a matter of personal preference - no single correct answer.

Cheers!

I still have the Romans dial. The sticks comparison is from a visit to a dealer in Tokyo. I just thought it was a good comparison shot.

[sond86]

I'd like to see meteorite as a dial option for 41mm

[big972]

Would love to have either of the 2. Personal preference for me though would be the DD2 as I have a big wrist. I took a photo of my DJ & DJ2 for comparison.. Aside from the size, What stood out is the size of the bezel. The bezel on the DJ looked really thin. - enjoy the watch.. Congrats

[emagni]

Originally Posted by Otto

I take exception to all the criticism of the bezel on the DD II. To me, it seems appropriate to the size of the watch. Here are a I and II side-by-side. They don't look so dramatically different in overall style; only in size. Look at each one in isolation and it's clear to me, at least, that both are just fine as a DD. Look at them together in a shop; and the II is clearly much bigger overall and it becomes easy to focus on that and enter an almost OCD state of mind in comparing the two versions with the familiar traditional size being the baseline for comparison. I know; been there; done that; moved on.

I see 36 mm DDs "in the wild" that look absolutely fantastic on the wearer; and I've seen my DD II (not many "in the wild" yet) on others and it looked great on them. I think in the end how they look on one's arm is the determinative factor on the 36 vs 41 decision; and that Rolex made a smart move in offering the larger alternative.

So...when it first came out, I focused on the bezel size when I looked at photos; and I was critical; but real world experience "in the wild" with both DD versions has convinced me that it's just like shoe size; get the one that fits best and if a wider width helps; go for it. To me, the larger bezel is a good idea for the larger dial. I chose the II for better or worse because it just felt better. I gave up my I to get the II.

Very good write up and as an owner of the II, I agree completely. Not sure how they could have made the II better but I'm glad they ship the idea of a bigger DD since the 36mm is too small for some follks.

[How]

They both look great, and kudos to Rolex for offering the DD in two sizes to cater for men (and women!) of all sizes tastes and preferences. Just Superb.

I absolutely love the Day-Date, the flagship of Rolex.

But if I may ask a 'beginner' question (pardon my ignorance), are the dials the exact same size in both the DDI and DDII? I.e. the extra width in the DDII comes purely from extra case and bezel width without an increase in the dial size?

[oceandweller]

Originally Posted by gwozhog

They are both fabulouse watches. Come on guys it's solid gold what's not to like about them. If you could turn a turd into gold people would still stare it.

Though it does not have as many followers as the Rolex tool and sport watches, the Rolex Day-Date is a classic in a class of its own. That it comes only in solid gold and platinum, says it all. The more you look at it, the more you love it, especially the dazzling fluted-bezel, whether on the I or II.

[Tan]

DDII for sure.

[RRGHOST1]

I love the DDII too,much prefer the bigger size,if only i could afford one ha ha !

[ajmexplorer]

BEAUTIFUL!

Id love to see what a smooth dial looked like on a DD2

[ajmexplorer]

OPPS, schoolboy error.... i mean bezel

[dvdwyn]

small wrist = 36mm, bigger wrist = 41mm

[Kingair]

I would have preferred the bezel size wise as on the 36 mm Day Day . . . a little smaller . .
For me the bezel is a to 'fat' . . .
I think that would have given the DD II an extra little subtile touch . . .
But that's me ;-)

And . . what the heck . . probably we all want to see something different . . .

HAGOne

[Joelmor]

I love the DDII in every metal and dial combination. I think they are gorgeous and along with the Daytona, my favorite of all the Rolexes. Since I got mine I do not pine for anything else (well a Platy with glacier dial would be nice). Here is my YG with white Romans:




Joel

[A.J.R.]

Lovely piece Joel.

[landroverking]

I just don't see the point in the DD II and the DJ II.
While some like them for me it would be like a 44mm sub.
Wait they already have that it's called the Deep Sea.
As a fan of the 40mm sport Rolexes "if it ain't broke don't fix it".

[wuyeah]

I don't think the DJII will sit well on my thin wrist. For you, I give you applauds ;)

[Eulogy]

The DDII looks sportier and just as well proportioned as the DD. So, to me, it would be just a matter of preference... and cost. $$$$

[Chipmunk]

I agree w/ Otto on the bezel size. The 41mm DD would not look good w/ a smaller size bezel. However, I like the proportion of the original DD.

[floater156]

Originally Posted by landroverking

I just don't see the point in the DD II and the DJ II.
While some like them....

You first and second sentences seem to contradict each other.

Some people like them - that's the point! Rolex wants to make watches that people like and will buy!

[Kingair]

Originally Posted by Chipmunk

I agree w/ Otto on the bezel size. The 41mm DD would not look good w/ a smaller size bezel. However, I like the proportion of the original DD.

There you go . . . ;-)

HAGOne

[SubmarinerMariner]

I had never considered a DD or DDII until I saw one on a female friend of mine in Barcelona...I couldn't take my eyes off the watch and resolved to try one on for myself to see how it would look...I had always considered it an 'older' man's watch, but after seeing it on my friend and realizing that I am now the age of the aforementioned 'older' man, I can now say 'why not'...

[jolimont]

Nothing says player better than a DD or DDII
I would be happy with either

[sond86]

I like DD2. Unfortunately these seem to command a high resale price still

I guess till the first ones have been out 5 years they will be high.