ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

DAN.K · 9 May 2008, 09:09 AM

is it an apperance thing?
What are the pros and cons of having a open lug hole case and a newer closed one?
Are the bars more resistant in any of those versions?

mike · 9 May 2008, 09:16 AM

Daniel, I'm not convinced there's any real difference in strength between lug holes vs. non.

Lug holes allow changing bracelets or straps to be a bit easier IMO and springbars are different.

Lug holes give a bit more vintage tool watch look to me, but others will disagree.

Jason Spring · 9 May 2008, 09:25 AM

I m totally with you Mike !!

Tools · 9 May 2008, 09:58 AM

I agree.

It probably boils down to aesthetics. Rolex probably is only trying to update their look and move from the "industrial" look that lugholes in the case have a flavor of to a more streamlined case side..

From an engineering perspective, I'm going to say that with the through holes you get full (more) extension of the attachment pin and therefore a tiny fraction of strength increase of the pin at the attachment (stress) point.

But it would be a stretch to say that that incremental amount would amount to much.

jlwc1974 · 9 May 2008, 10:47 AM

lug holes look old-school to me. why? for the simple reason most new models introduced by Rolex nowadays do not come with lug holes anymore

Dan Pierce · 9 May 2008, 10:50 AM

Always thought I would prefer the no hole look but all my oysters have them. Honestly, I never notice them.
dP

Wolfgang427 · 9 May 2008, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlwc1974

lug holes look old-school to me. why? for the simple reason most new models introduced by Rolex nowadays do not come with lug holes anymore

It may be old-school and I like the holes, but no lug holes are not a "new" thing with Rolex.

Look at my early 50's DJ with no lug-holes.

East Bay Rider · 9 May 2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfgang427

It may be old-school and I like the holes, but no lug holes are not a "new" thing with Rolex.

Look at my early 50's DJ with no lug-holes.

What a nice looking watch.

Magik · 9 May 2008, 11:55 AM

I thought I would have a preference, but to tell you the truth, I don't notice the holes one way or the other when I wear my watches.

SPACE-DWELLER · 9 May 2008, 06:00 PM

Personally, I love the lug holes. Somehow a tool watch like the SD ought to have them. But alas, the current SD's haven't got lug holes.

Now that the SD is going to be discontinued, I might get a nice preowned one with lug holes as a spare SD. Or maybe I should go for a modern Sub ND. That's the last current Rolex with lug holes.

marshallr47 · 9 May 2008, 06:08 PM

Both are fine with me. Lug holes give a classic look.

swatty · 9 May 2008, 08:26 PM

Lug holes give a classic look and make braclet removal a lot easier,

sherwin · 9 May 2008, 11:20 PM

also if rust ever gets in, you can easily put some WD-40 and hammer (gently!) the pins to get them out.

Trurolexer · 10 May 2008, 12:08 AM

Agree with Mike here!!! Lug or not lug, it's OK with me.

Gurmot · 10 May 2008, 12:16 AM

IMHO a tool watch needs the holes and a dress watch doesn't. But hey, it seems as though Rolex are determined to sail on with their design changes so the through-holes will soon be a thing of the past.

Bobareno · 10 May 2008, 12:17 AM

As long as it's a Rolex!

9 May 2008, 09:09 AM	#1
DAN.K Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Daniel Location: Brazil Posts: 114	Open case or not... is it an apperance thing? What are the pros and cons of having a open lug hole case and a newer closed one? Are the bars more resistant in any of those versions?

9 May 2008, 09:25 AM	#3
Jason Spring "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: France Posts: 300	I m totally with you Mike !! __________________ visit my blog : http://watchparabellum.blogspot.com/ Enjoy your visit !!!!!!! -- WTB:Rolex Submariner ref 5513 --

9 May 2008, 09:58 AM	#4
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,514	I agree. It probably boils down to aesthetics. Rolex probably is only trying to update their look and move from the "industrial" look that lugholes in the case have a flavor of to a more streamlined case side.. From an engineering perspective, I'm going to say that with the through holes you get full (more) extension of the attachment pin and therefore a tiny fraction of strength increase of the pin at the attachment (stress) point. But it would be a stretch to say that that incremental amount would amount to much. __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

9 May 2008, 10:50 AM	#6
Dan Pierce 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Real Name: D'OH! Location: Kentucky Watch: Rolex-1 Tudor-3 Posts: 36,215	Always thought I would prefer the no hole look but all my oysters have them. Honestly, I never notice them. dP __________________ TRF Member# 1668 Bass Player in TRF "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Band Commander-in-Chief of The Nylon Nation The Crown & Shield Club Honorary Member of P-Club

9 May 2008, 06:00 PM	#10
SPACE-DWELLER "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Real Name: Bo Location: Denmark Watch: Rolex, of course! Posts: 22,436	Personally, I love the lug holes. Somehow a tool watch like the SD ought to have them. But alas, the current SD's haven't got lug holes. Now that the SD is going to be discontinued, I might get a nice preowned one with lug holes as a spare SD. Or maybe I should go for a modern Sub ND. That's the last current Rolex with lug holes. __________________ With kind regards, Bo LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...

9 May 2008, 09:16 AM	#2
mike "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 22,683	Daniel, I'm not convinced there's any real difference in strength between lug holes vs. non. Lug holes allow changing bracelets or straps to be a bit easier IMO and springbars are different. Lug holes give a bit more vintage tool watch look to me, but others will disagree.

9 May 2008, 10:47 AM	#5
jlwc1974 Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Singapore Posts: 86	lug holes look old-school to me. why? for the simple reason most new models introduced by Rolex nowadays do not come with lug holes anymore

9 May 2008, 11:55 AM	#9
Magik Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Real Name: Patrick Location: Royal Kunia, HI Watch: Sub-Date & GMT ll Posts: 603	I thought I would have a preference, but to tell you the truth, I don't notice the holes one way or the other when I wear my watches.

9 May 2008, 06:08 PM	#11
marshallr47 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Real Name: Ron Location: Alabama Watch: Daytona,TT Sub,GMT Posts: 4,673	Both are fine with me. Lug holes give a classic look. __________________ Ron

9 May 2008, 08:26 PM	#12
swatty 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Peter Location: Sydney Watch: The Game Posts: 17,415	Lug holes give a classic look and make braclet removal a lot easier,

9 May 2008, 11:20 PM	#13
sherwin "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Perth/Singapore Posts: 1,764	also if rust ever gets in, you can easily put some WD-40 and hammer (gently!) the pins to get them out. __________________ Want to Buy:SS GMT black;116509 WG Daytona Metrorite

10 May 2008, 12:08 AM	#14
Trurolexer Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex Posts: 18,421	Agree with Mike here!!! Lug or not lug, it's OK with me.

10 May 2008, 12:16 AM	#15
Gurmot Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Real Name: Simon Location: UK Posts: 568	IMHO a tool watch needs the holes and a dress watch doesn't. But hey, it seems as though Rolex are determined to sail on with their design changes so the through-holes will soon be a thing of the past.

10 May 2008, 12:17 AM	#16
Bobareno Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Phoenix Posts: 739	As long as it's a Rolex!

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