ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
19 March 2015, 07:55 PM | #31 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Glasgow, UK
Watch: 16570
Posts: 909
|
Probably why they have never realised jubilee bracelets for the DJII.
|
19 March 2015, 08:29 PM | #32 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Real Name: Craig
Location: Sydney
Watch: 4 Broken glass
Posts: 5,808
|
I have posted elsewhere on the fact that ALS took their large 1815 back from 40mm to 38.5. The AD indicated it was due to the high number of Asian buyers who wanted a dress watch and liked larger watches but could not pull off a larger watch. I think this probably drove Rolex as well. If the target buyer of DJ2 is different to DD2 they may not change it. I am sure Rolex would know well the split of their buyers/locations etc. the smaller DD would make it appeal to a larger audience, might not for the DJ.
__________________
Day Date 118206, Daytona 116509 & 116505, AP 25859ST Gone but not forgotten and genuinely missed..... Root Beer GMT, Sub, TT Daytona, YG DD Bark, Datejust(2 his & hers), AP RO, PP Aquanaut, Lange 1, Heuer Monza, Piaget Altiplano, GP Chrono, Seamaster, Tudor Sub, Tudor Chrono, Tudor Black Bay Bronze |
19 March 2015, 08:56 PM | #33 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: DC
Posts: 24
|
I would prefer a DJII in 39/40mm. If they kept 41mm, seems like 39mm might be a possibility, consistent with the new OP 39mm. The proportions look great on that one (as well as on the DDII 40mm), so I would definitely go for a DJII 39mm.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.