What beats a Rolex?

[Token74]

I am a huge Rolex fan and believe them to be the pioneers of the watch industry; I currently own two Rolex watches (the new Sea Dweller and a GMT Master 2) and I also bought my wife one last year.

I have sold my other premium watches (Baume & Mercier and Bremont) as frankly they simply don't compare to the quality and feel of Rolex. The only other watches I now have are a TAG Microtimer (for sentimental reasons) and a G-Shock.

I'm probably going to add a Speedmaster to my collection as a good quality beater, but I'm also looking to add another real premium watch to my collection.

Although I like other Rolex models, the only model that would compete with my Sea Dweller for wrist time is the platinum Daytona (which I adore); however, I don't have that kind of cash sadly.

So I need to consider an alternative; so my questions are:

(1) Are Patek Philippe that much better quality than Rolex to justify the premium?

(2) Do the cheaper Patek models (Nautilus 5711 or the Aquanaut) live up to the Patek quality?

(3) Which other brands live up to (and maybe even exceed) the Rolex quality levels without going above the £25k price bracket?

(4) And finally, how good do you think Rolex really are?

Token

[Trouble15]

I'm a big Rolex fan and think they are built tough as nails (especially the sports models), with great quality, and great looks. However, PP > Rolex hands down (sadly I don't own any PP, yet..).

[antbkny]

Everyone's perception is a bit different, but for me, nothing compares. Rolex is in a class by itself. They are the best in their class for sure. I purchase other brands for other reasons.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Trouble15

I'm a big Rolex fan and think they are built tough as nails (especially the sports models), with great quality, and great looks. However, PP > Rolex hands down (sadly I don't own any PP, yet..).

Ditto this

I've been looking at the PP5711 and this is in a different league IMO. Having said that, I believe Rolex are positioned as a good, durable, upper mid level watch

[jhcam8]

I think you were in apples to oranges when comparing your Rolexes to the watches you sold.

Rolex is mid-level, in general, I think.

[landroverking]

Rolex is really middle of the pack. Top ten, but closer to ten than one.
That said I feel the same way, partly because the oyster cases are tought as nails.
IMO the Sea Dweller and DS are the toughtest watches on the planet.

[s14roller]

Sometimes the easiest comparisons are used with cars.

If Rolex can be compared to something like a BMW, Benz, Audi, etc., then I think it would be fair to say Patek, AP, VC, would be more like a Bentley, Lambo, Porsche, etc.

I feel like these comparisons have been beat to death though.

Buy what you like is what I say.

[BBQ BOY]

I'm somewhat new to the game of watches too, but have loved them for ever. I am ignorant about PP, but what makes them so much better than Rolex? From what i gather, they are a very sensitive watch. I tried them on, and while they are nice, I don't see what the fuss is all about, especially for the price tag they carry.
Also, why is Rolex considered mid-tier? Is AP, Breguet, JLC top tier when compared to Rolex? If so, what makes them so much better?

[HogwldFLTR]

What beats a Rolex?

Only this...



Frankly you can keep the other brands; I'll stick with Rolex.

[Token74]

Originally Posted by jhcam8

I think you were in apples to oranges when comparing your Rolexes to the watches you sold.

Rolex is mid-level, in general, I think.

I agree entirely about my watches but I was more thinking of like-for-like. For instance, an SS Nautilus is similar money to a White Gold Daytona; the Daytona has a more complicated movement, is probably more durable, and is made of solid gold...so why is a SS Patek more expensive? Is the quality of the finish, and the parts, that much superior? Or is it just that you are paying a price for it being hand made? Or is it just amazing marketing?

[Time Exposure]

Rolex durability is legendary. But some folks like watches whose every detail is painstakingly crafted to perfection. That would be Patek Philippe, A Lange and the like, not Rolex.
One of the best articles I read on Rolex dissects a late'90's Explorer. The author is shocked a watch can be so poorly finished, yet keep accurate time. Look up Odets and Explorer in a search engine.

[Arthur M]

Rolex is firmly mid-tier (on the upper side of it). They are masters of the workhorse movement and I love them for it, but they just aren't haut horology like Patek, Vacheron, AP, Lange, FP Journe, etc. Nor are they on level with a company like Jaeger who is closer to High end Horology than they are to Rolex. Rolex makes great built for purpose watches and they are certainly pioneers, but they aren't artisans or masters of the craft; they just make luxurious tool watches, for the most part.

[mike]

Moved since this really isn't about Rolex, but what else is there?

[elcompa]

Originally Posted by Time Exposure

Rolex durability is legendary. But some folks like watches whose every detail is painstakingly crafted to perfection. That would be Patek Philippe, A Lange and the like, not Rolex.
One of the best articles I read on Rolex dissects a late'90's Explorer. The author is shocked a watch can be so poorly finished, yet keep accurate time. Look up Odets and Explorer in a search engine.

Time Exposure,
Thanks for this. Found it and read it. http://people.timezone.com/library/h...horologium0036

Interesting and educational. I guess if you look closely at anything you can find fault. Glad I never look this close....

[joe100]

Rolex makes more watches in a year than Patek has ever made. Ever.

The only 2 brands which interest me are Rolex and Omega. I'd like a 1960s time only Patek around 34mm though. It might even be my next purchase, but I always come home to Rolex

[improviz]

Making more does not mean "better crafted or finished", otherwise Toyotas are more finely crafted than Rolls Royce (and no, I'm not comparing Rolexes to Toyotas, before anyone takes it that way...).

The fact is that Rolex watches are great watches of fine quality, but there are features they lack (fine finishing of movement, case, dial, etc.) that people are willing to pay more for. Further, there are complications that they do not make (perpetual etc.), so if you want one of those you have to go elsewhere.

[vman]

Rolex: barely mid-level luxury.
Patek: one of the top three (yes even for its entry level models)

[Arthur M]

Originally Posted by joe100

Rolex makes more watches in a year than Patek has ever made. Ever.

The only 2 brands which interest me are Rolex and Omega. I'd like a 1960s time only Patek around 34mm though. It might even be my next purchase, but I always come home to Rolex

Impressive, but quantity does not inform quality. Anyway, Rolex are one of the best at what they do and what they do is make watches, not timepieces. Omega is up there too. Just awesome tool watches.

[masterserg]

Go try an AP and you'll be able to answer your own question :)

Seriously, in my opinion, Rolex is unbeaten in its class and for their purpose.

[Time Exposure]

Originally Posted by masterserg

olex is unbeaten in its class and for their purpose.

Absolutely agree. I'll add this: I have one Patek Philippe, and had the privilege of owning (and flipping) five others since 1993. They are my absolute favorite watch company, and in my opinion they are the finest made watches with the greatest attention to detail of all the mass production watch makers (more than 1000 per year).
But for daily wear, durability, reliability, accuracy, and true pleasure of ownership, absolutely NOTHING beats Rolex for the same money. For all it's imperfections and high price relative to other capable watches, it is truly a quality watch worth wearing.

[diver2012]

Watch a video like this and you will see why you pay a premium for AP,PP,VC etc...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFwncagQWYE

[capote]

I feel Rolex history, durability, conservative approach and a well oiled marketing machine leaves it without real competition. Sure you can get a nicer finished movement elsewhere, fancier complications and exotic materials, but you can't get a Rolex elsewhere. Besides, if you are into vintage there are aaaalot to choose from and a great community with fellow enthusiasts.

[ansharma]

In my opinion JLC is the next step up from Rolex, mainly due to having in house made movements made primarily by hand. They also have far more complicated movements and are leading watchmaking innovation. The finishing on the case and dial is far more detailed. They are the watchmakers watch brand and represent good value considering what you are getting.

[FTX I]

It's a matter of personal preference, Vince. If I want a brand new watch I will consider Omega and Rolex and that's it.

[HL65]

Patek for me is the very best...That takes nothing away from Rolex which was my first love - just a totally different kind of watch IMHO. As for 5711 to me the most elegant, simple sports watch with a dial second to none--so slim and sleek with the silkiest bracelet. The Aquanaut also a special watch and high quality too--especially partial to the RG one since I own it. The watch is pure quality and on the wrist perfection. As stated above taste is subjective and of course price dictates choices in many cases.

[kilyung]

Originally Posted by Token74

I have sold my other premium watches (Baume & Mercier and Bremont) as frankly they simply don't compare to the quality and feel of Rolex. The only other watches I now have are a TAG Microtimer (for sentimental reasons) and a G-Shock.

(1) Are Patek Philippe that much better quality than Rolex to justify the premium?

(2) Do the cheaper Patek models (Nautilus 5711 or the Aquanaut) live up to the Patek quality?

(3) Which other brands live up to (and maybe even exceed) the Rolex quality levels without going above the £25k price bracket?

(4) And finally, how good do you think Rolex really are?

Token

No offense but I think most WIS would discount B&M and maybe even Bremont as premium watches. By the way, love the MicroTimer!

1) PP is exceptional in many ways but "better than Rolex" is entirely subjective.
2) I know what you meant, but there's nothing cheap about the 5167/5711 models.
3) Another entirely subjective question depending on your definition of "quality".
4) So good that I own a fair number of them in what is IMO a pretty nice collection.

[BomB#Frog]

The question is what beats Rolex at what? If your talking sports watches....nobody comes close to the heritage and sheer numbers of classic timeless models. If your talking complicated, more hand finishing/made, haute horology and prestige the "holy trinity" is where it is at for most enthusiasts. AP, PP, VC, and not in that order.

[jvo300]

Originally Posted by kilyung

No offense but I think most WIS would discount B&M and maybe even Bremont as premium watches. By the way, love the MicroTimer!

1) PP is exceptional in many ways but "better than Rolex" is entirely subjective.
2) I know what you meant, but there's nothing cheap about the 5167/5711 models.
3) Another entirely subjective question depending on your definition of "quality".
4) So good that I own a fair number of them in what is IMO a pretty nice collection.

Sums it up. For my money and purposes, Rolex can't be beat.

[joli160]

I don't have the knowledge to judge the quality, but reading the article on the movement of the Explorer there must be better ones for sure.
Would love to own a Lange or PP, but am very happy and totally satisfied with my Rolex watches. They give me a lot of smiles and joy.

[GB-man]

Rolex owns it's market handily IMHO. Then again patek owns it's segment too. Want something in the middle? Who wouldn't...hello AP. don't overthink it

Buy what you like and can afford!