ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

SWISSAHOLICS · 14 May 2013, 12:43 AM

Happy Monday my friends

Hope you all had a wonderful weekend!! Just had a question that came to mind and if there is a thread on this earlier, please accept my apology.

Why has Rolex never come out with Titanium models? For a company with such rich history, I am sure they must have done research about this topic. Is it something to do with durability? Or perhaps certain watch parts don't function well with titanium metal? I am just throwing out ideas but would be curious to know what could be the reason.

Thanks guys!!

SLS · 14 May 2013, 12:52 AM

Who needs titanium when you use 904L

Not sure really, but you never know what the future holds.
Scott

padi56 · 14 May 2013, 12:56 AM

Well they have a Titanium case back on the DSSD plus Tudor Pelagos myself not a huge fan of all Titanium watches,but the movement would run fine whether the whole case was made from Titanium SS or precious metal.

OrangeSport · 14 May 2013, 12:57 AM

Not sure if there would be much to gain from using it, but it is a very tactile metal isn't it? Nice and "warm".

Rashid.bk · 14 May 2013, 01:16 AM

Pelagos

SWISSAHOLICS · 14 May 2013, 01:21 AM

I know a lot of guys don't like the weight of certain models especially the DSSD....perhaps if DSSD would be made in titanium instead of just the caseback as Peter pointed out, you may see more people wearing them. I am not a titanium fan myself but just wondered why Rolex never even came out with even one model in their assortment.

ecsub44 · 14 May 2013, 01:26 AM

Tudor Pelagos

belligero · 14 May 2013, 01:49 AM

As mentioned above, the 116660's case back is titanium.

In my experience, one practical downside of titanium is that threaded fasteners made from it can gall together, but galling can sometimes happen with stainless as well. You can prevent this by applying anti-seize compound to the threads. The probable main reason it isn't used is simply that it just doesn't look as good as stainless steel for a watch.

Rashid.bk · 14 May 2013, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by belligero

As mentioned above, the 116660's case back is titanium.

In my experience, one practical downside of titanium is that threaded fasteners made from it can gall together, but galling can sometimes happen with stainless as well. You can prevent this by applying anti-seize compound to the threads. The probable main reason it isn't used is simply that it just doesn't look as good as stainless steel for a watch.

One look at an Omega LM Ti in person and I completely disagree.

White_Au · 14 May 2013, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

One look at an Omega LM Ti in person and I completely disagree.

I sure like the way my PAM176 looks.

JasoninDenver · 14 May 2013, 01:56 AM

The only watch that I would give up my SubC for would be a titanium SubC.

I had a Ti Seamaster and would vastly prefer the look and comfort of a Ti watch if only it were available.

Rashid.bk · 14 May 2013, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by White_Au

I sure like the way my PAM176 looks.

joe100 · 14 May 2013, 02:19 AM

I have a Panerai 176 and for a watch with that heft, a titanium case makes sense. For Rolex, it would just be a novelty. Not really needed.

kilyung · 14 May 2013, 02:20 AM

Several companies have a long history of producing great Ti watches without performance or aesthetic issues. IWC comes to mind and even Tudor's Pelagos speaks volumes about Rolex's ability to do so. Seems like a product decision more than anything.

JP Chestnut · 14 May 2013, 02:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

One look at an Omega LM Ti in person and I completely disagree.

I agree. Some Ti Grand Seikos are absolutely beautifully finished. I think the real reason is that Rolex traditionally has been a slow to evolve company. Their dive watches have always been SS, and they didn't really jump on the Ti bandwagon when it was new (pioneered by IWC in their amazing Ocean 2000).

SWISSAHOLICS · 14 May 2013, 02:27 AM

As others have pointed here, Tudor Pelagos does come to mind. I know guys who only prefer to wear titanium instead of steel due to weight reasons. Perhaps Rolex has a year now till Basel 2014 to introduce a titanium Sub-C.

Frosty · 14 May 2013, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JasoninDenver

The only watch that I would give up my SubC for would be a titanium SubC.

I had a Ti Seamaster and would vastly prefer the look and comfort of a Ti watch if only it were available.

+2 The Ti Seamaster is a very comfortable watch to wear.

Lion · 14 May 2013, 04:09 AM

If it ain't broke...why fix it!!!

Take it easy.....Leo

ecsub44 · 14 May 2013, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SWISSAHOLICS

As others have pointed here, Tudor Pelagos does come to mind. I know guys who only prefer to wear titanium instead of steel due to weight reasons. Perhaps Rolex has a year now till Basel 2014 to introduce a titanium Sub-C.

Highly doubt it.

That's what Tudor is for. Rolex can "stay the course" and innovate through Tudor.

Maybe someday Rolex will institute some of these concept...maybe.

Cru Jones · 14 May 2013, 04:32 AM

Seems like steel, gold and platinum for Rolex, and steel, titanium and ceramic for Tudor.

That's fine, though a titanium Rolex in the right form would be cool.

Solo118 · 14 May 2013, 04:41 AM

Maybe they got too much flack for having a "cheap" feeling watch with 16610,16600 etc and they want new watches to have some heft??

ec51 · 14 May 2013, 06:00 AM

What about Tungsten Carbide...?

I have a TC wedding band and it is indestructible. It has yet to even scratch.

Eulogy · 14 May 2013, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo118

Maybe they got too much flack for having a "cheap" feeling watch with 16610,16600 etc and they want new watches to have some heft??

I've read more than once on these pages that 'heft' is what some prefer about the newer Rolex models over the more classic ones.

77T · 14 May 2013, 06:42 AM

Give Rolex some time and I think you'll see a titanium case and eventually a ceramic one, too.

RolexDivers · 14 May 2013, 06:46 AM

Compared to steel watches, titanium watches look and feel cheap ... their lusteris terrible as well ,, they look dull and don't shine like steel...I am glad Rolex does not make any watches in Ti...

Rashid.bk · 14 May 2013, 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RolexDivers

Compared to steel watches, titanium watches look and feel cheap ... their lusteris terrible as well ,, they look dull and don't shine like steel...I am glad Rolex does not make any watches in Ti...

Another one....

For sh_ts and giggles, walk into an Omega showroom on your free time and look at an Omega LM Ti. I think you will change opinions on aesthetics.
I felt the same until I saw that thing in the flesh, If Omega can make such a beautiful watch, I'm sure Rolex can also.

Rolex has left Ti for Tudor's use. Rolex is about hi grade metals, A grade 5 titanium Rolex Sub would likely be north of $15k. Rolex loyalist will cringe at the Ti and the rest will cringe at the price. Failure on launch - when you're speaking about the masses.
In a few years Rolex will dive further into ceramics, a full ceramic Rolex isn't too far away, but I think it's more realistic than Ti.

RolexDivers · 14 May 2013, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rashid.bk

Another one....

For sh_ts and giggles, walk into an Omega showroom on your free time and look at an Omega LM Ti. I think you will change opinions on aesthetics.
I felt the same until I saw that thing in the flesh, If Omega can make such a beautiful watch, I'm sure Rolex can also.

Rolex has left Ti for Tudor's use. Rolex is about hi grade metals, A grade 5 titanium Rolex Sub would likely be north of $15k. Rolex loyalist will cringe at the Ti and the rest will cringe at the price. Failure on launch - when you're speaking about the masses.
In a few years Rolex will dive further into ceramics, a full ceramic Rolex isn't too far away, but I think it's more realistic than Ti.

Not seen Omega in Ti but others I have seen, do not have the substantial weight of the 904L and just don't have that SS shine that Rolex is known for.I agree Ti is a more expensive material than SS but it always has that dull gray luster to it that I don't care for ...

applebook · 14 May 2013, 08:15 AM

I don't really care for Ti. Its dull finish can be attractive on certain watches but not all.

Also, I prefer the heft of 42mm x 15mm stainless watches.

wiseoldlady2001 · 14 May 2013, 08:17 AM

Do they make light weight Rolexs?

RolexDivers · 14 May 2013, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiseoldlady2001

Do they make light weight Rolexs?

They are called Cellinis!

14 May 2013, 12:43 AM	#1
SWISSAHOLICS "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Here! Watch: Rolex Posts: 4,366	Titanium rolex Happy Monday my friends Hope you all had a wonderful weekend!! Just had a question that came to mind and if there is a thread on this earlier, please accept my apology. Why has Rolex never come out with Titanium models? For a company with such rich history, I am sure they must have done research about this topic. Is it something to do with durability? Or perhaps certain watch parts don't function well with titanium metal? I am just throwing out ideas but would be curious to know what could be the reason. Thanks guys!! __________________ 16610LN \| 16613LB \| 16710 Pepsi \| 118238 \| 116500 (White) \| 116500 (Black) \| 116710BLNR \| 116610LV "The one thing I fear most is time; time waits for no one and leaves no options."

14 May 2013, 12:52 AM	#2
SLS "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Scott Location: GMT -7 Watch: GMT's & Sub's Posts: 10,401	Who needs titanium when you use 904L Not sure really, but you never know what the future holds. Scott __________________ "The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of lower price is forgotten." -Benjamin Franklin Member No. 922

14 May 2013, 12:56 AM	#3
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 53,063	Well they have a Titanium case back on the DSSD plus Tudor Pelagos myself not a huge fan of all Titanium watches,but the movement would run fine whether the whole case was made from Titanium SS or precious metal. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

14 May 2013, 12:57 AM	#4
OrangeSport "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Real Name: Jason Location: Essex, UK Watch: 14060M Posts: 2,943	Not sure if there would be much to gain from using it, but it is a very tactile metal isn't it? Nice and "warm". __________________

14 May 2013, 01:21 AM	#6
SWISSAHOLICS "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Here! Watch: Rolex Posts: 4,366	I know a lot of guys don't like the weight of certain models especially the DSSD....perhaps if DSSD would be made in titanium instead of just the caseback as Peter pointed out, you may see more people wearing them. I am not a titanium fan myself but just wondered why Rolex never even came out with even one model in their assortment. __________________ 16610LN \| 16613LB \| 16710 Pepsi \| 118238 \| 116500 (White) \| 116500 (Black) \| 116710BLNR \| 116610LV "The one thing I fear most is time; time waits for no one and leaves no options."

14 May 2013, 01:16 AM	#5
Rashid.bk "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Dallas Watch: 12800ft = 3900m Posts: 11,173	Pelagos

14 May 2013, 01:26 AM	#7
ecsub44 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: US Watch: Sub Posts: 3,175	Tudor Pelagos __________________ *侘寂 -- wabi-sabi --* acceptance of transience and imperfection by finding beauty in that which is imperfect, impermanent, and incomplete Commissioner of WEIRD POLICE , Badge # ecsub44

14 May 2013, 01:49 AM	#8
belligero Banned Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: EUR Posts: 487	As mentioned above, the 116660's case back is titanium. In my experience, one practical downside of titanium is that threaded fasteners made from it can gall together, but galling can sometimes happen with stainless as well. You can prevent this by applying anti-seize compound to the threads. The probable main reason it isn't used is simply that it just doesn't look as good as stainless steel for a watch.

14 May 2013, 01:56 AM	#11
JasoninDenver 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Denver Posts: 4,284	The only watch that I would give up my SubC for would be a titanium SubC. I had a Ti Seamaster and would vastly prefer the look and comfort of a Ti watch if only it were available. __________________ Jason 116610 LN DateJust Pelagos FXD

14 May 2013, 02:19 AM	#13
joe100 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: New Mexico Watch: Explorer Posts: 12,840	I have a Panerai 176 and for a watch with that heft, a titanium case makes sense. For Rolex, it would just be a novelty. Not really needed. __________________ It's Espresso, not Expresso. Coffee is not a train in Italy. -TRF Member 6982-

14 May 2013, 02:20 AM	#14
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	Several companies have a long history of producing great Ti watches without performance or aesthetic issues. IWC comes to mind and even Tudor's Pelagos speaks volumes about Rolex's ability to do so. Seems like a product decision more than anything.

14 May 2013, 02:27 AM	#16
SWISSAHOLICS "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Here! Watch: Rolex Posts: 4,366	As others have pointed here, Tudor Pelagos does come to mind. I know guys who only prefer to wear titanium instead of steel due to weight reasons. Perhaps Rolex has a year now till Basel 2014 to introduce a titanium Sub-C. __________________ 16610LN \| 16613LB \| 16710 Pepsi \| 118238 \| 116500 (White) \| 116500 (Black) \| 116710BLNR \| 116610LV "The one thing I fear most is time; time waits for no one and leaves no options."

14 May 2013, 04:09 AM	#18
Lion "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Leo Location: Midwest Watch: GMT-II 16710 PEPSI Posts: 21,461	If it ain't broke...why fix it!!! Take it easy.....Leo __________________ SS GMT-II 16710 PEPSI(Z-serial#) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND BOYS IS THE PRICE OF THE TOYS!!! MontBlanc Meisterstuck Doue Silver Barley MontBlanc Meisterstuck Solitaire Doue Signum Proud Card Carrying Member of the Curmudgeons.....Yikes!!!

14 May 2013, 04:32 AM	#20
Cru Jones 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Paris, France Posts: 35,301	Seems like steel, gold and platinum for Rolex, and steel, titanium and ceramic for Tudor. That's fine, though a titanium Rolex in the right form would be cool.

14 May 2013, 04:41 AM	#21
Solo118 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Watch: Daytona Posts: 6,092	Maybe they got too much flack for having a "cheap" feeling watch with 16610,16600 etc and they want new watches to have some heft??

14 May 2013, 06:00 AM	#22
ec51 Banned Join Date: Apr 2011 Real Name: Eric Location: NY Watch: 14060M Posts: 1,642	What about Tungsten Carbide...? I have a TC wedding band and it is indestructible. It has yet to even scratch.

14 May 2013, 06:42 AM	#24
77T 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: PaulG Location: Georgia Posts: 42,024	Give Rolex some time and I think you'll see a titanium case and eventually a ceramic one, too. __________________ Does anyone really know what time it is?

14 May 2013, 06:46 AM	#25
RolexDivers Banned Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: BIG BEAR, CA Posts: 1,468	Compared to steel watches, titanium watches look and feel cheap ... their lusteris terrible as well ,, they look dull and don't shine like steel...I am glad Rolex does not make any watches in Ti...

14 May 2013, 08:15 AM	#28
applebook "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: vancouver Posts: 1,918	I don't really care for Ti. Its dull finish can be attractive on certain watches but not all. Also, I prefer the heft of 42mm x 15mm stainless watches. __________________

14 May 2013, 08:17 AM	#29
wiseoldlady2001 Banned Join Date: Mar 2013 Real Name: June Location: Charlotte NC Watch: 16600 Posts: 47	Do they make light weight Rolexs?

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