2 questionable Rolex design choices

[Macnavara]

Originally Posted by ernie2

This is just a personal opinion and not meant to offend current owners of the referred watches. You don't have to agree with me, it is just my observation.

For the record, I am not bashing Rolex, I own 3 Rolexes ( EXP 1, EXP 2, SD4K) and I love Rolex's quality and design. However, as a design professional, there are 2 design flaws keep sticking out as eyesores to me.

In every aspect of the Rolex watches, the curves of the case, the fonts of the lettering, the color schemes were well designed aesthetically to please our eyes. But there are 2 things just seemed to be afterthoughts without any design put into it.

1. The 24hr hand of the last generation Explorer 2 16570 and all the GMTs. All the hands of the Rolexes had some design elements to them. Be the Mercedes shape, the 3D tapering of the DD, or the round lume dot on the second hands. If you look at the 24hr hand of the above mentioned models, they are straight sticks with an isosceles triangles at the end. Like street yield signs. They do not even have tapering and do not look like they belong with the rest of the watch hands.

Luckily, at the new Explorer II 216570, they changed the 24hr hands. But it seems like there is no plans to update the GMTs.

2. A lot of people are going to disagree with this one here. I cannot stand the thick metal ring inside the DSSD. It has no curve lines, no chamfering, like a piece of plumbing parts from home depot. And don't get me started on the big lettering of the RING LOCK SYSTEM. That is similar to people wearing big GUCCI prints on their clothes, you can see it from a block away.

These are just my observations. I hope no owners of GMTs and DSSD are offended.

Im offended

[Roller07]

I own a few GMT's and I'm offended.

[eonflux]

Actually, the triangle of the GMT 24-hour hand makes a lot sense given the other hands.
The hands are distinct and there's minimal overlap with lume.

The triangle of the 24-hour hand extends beyond the luminescent part of the minute hand. Since the 24-hour bezel is the ring furthest out, there is a logic to the design (including length) of that hand, with that triangle distinct from the lume on all the other hands. One issue though is that even though the 24-hour hand has lume, the 24-hour bezel does not, so the lume doesn't really help.

[Wingman244]

deleted

[eonflux]

I too would prefer not to have writing on the ring lock of the DSSD, but the letters are pretty much not noticeable when on the wrist...

[Wingman244]

deleted...

[Speed]

Originally Posted by mike

Aha!!!

Thanks Mike. News to me!

[Rock]

As a 'fellow design nut' I understand your interest in the sort of detail stuff you mention.
'Design nuts' look at everything with a critical eye - watches, cars, toasters, etc.
The 'Mercedes symbol' on the end of the hour hand on some Rolex watches annoys me as it looks (to me) totally out of place. On the other hand (no pun intended) the triangle on the GMT doesn't bother me, although I know what you mean.

[Camel]

"RING LOCK SYSTEM" writing is barely visable when wearing the watch.

[997.2]

Originally Posted by superdog

ok. Fair opinions.

How are they design flaws?

Because you don't like them? Or are they flawed?

[Danny83]

Originally Posted by needlesskane

i think you're confusing "flaws" and "personal preference"

what you described are not flaws in terms of workmanship, but rather design differences.

x2

[landroverking]

With regards to GMT. It's fucnaction over fashion.

[ernie2]

This thread is kind of old and I would like to put a closure to it. For starter, I am in the design profession so I pay attention to things the general public would not notice or even care.

Design / aesthetic is very subjective and there is no right or wrong. However, there is a difference between good design and bad design. There are some basic principles in modern designs that are time proven to please the human eyes and human minds. You sometimes see people hanging a group of pictures on the wall and they just look like crap. Sometimes, you see a photo wall that is well placed with consistent gutters and layouts, you go WOW.

Take sport cars for example. In 60s - 70s, sport cars are curvy such as the stingray vettes, Porsches. Then in the 80s- early 90s, they are boxy, such as the Ferrari Testarossa & Delorean. Nowadays, they hard curves in silhouette with hardline details, such as the Lambo Aventador. People like different aesthetics at different times. But in all of these iconic designs, the design languages on the cars are CONSISTENT. You will not see a car with an 80s front and 2015 back. If the design is not CONSISTENT, the end product will look funny. Other than the wheels, there are no circles in an Aventador.

In my 2 complaints about Rolex's design choices, I am not talking about the workmanship or engineering, I was bitching about the aesthetic inconsistencies.

If you look at the last generation GMTs , every part of the watch had design considerations put into it. The san serif font on the bezel is consistent with the fonts on the dial. The metal borders surrounding the lume dots had the same thickness as the metal border of the lume triangle. But then you look at the 24hr hand, it is a straight stick with a triangle at the tip. Where else in the watch shares this aesthetic choice ? And if you look closely, the triangle at the tip of the 24hr hand is not even the same triangle as the 12 o'clock marker.

All the inconsistencies points to one explanation: The 24hr hand was designed by a different person / team after the watch's chief designer/team. It looks to me it was something the original team didn't / forgot to design and someone came in to patch it up after the original team was gone.

Please don't be offended. This is my profession and (I see dead people). If you are a chef, I bet you can taste subtle ingredients in a dish which I cannot distinguish and probably didn't know they exist.

Hope this will answer all the doubts the post has created.

[johneh]

Originally Posted by ernie2

Design / aesthetic is very subjective and there is no right or wrong. However, there is a difference between good design and bad design.

Design is very subjective. You might think it's a bad design, but someone at Rolex thought it was a good design and others agreed. Chances are they're very good at their job, and better than you when it comes to designing watches as that's what they would specialize in.

You should have started this thread by just saying "I don't like the GMT hand or the writing on the DSSD"

[ernie2]

Originally Posted by johneh

Design is very subjective. You might think it's a bad design, but someone at Rolex thought it was a good design and others agreed. Chances are they're very good at their job, and better than you when it comes to designing watches as that's what they would specialize in.

You should have started this thread by just saying "I don't like the GMT hand or the writing on the DSSD"

John, no need to get personal here. I gather you are not in the design field so you may not understand my points. But it is all good.

So you are saying because people at Rolex do this for a living, so it is not possible for them to make a single bad design choice ?

[johneh]

Originally Posted by ernie2

John, no need to get personal here. I gather you are not in the design field so you may not understand my points. But it is all good.

So you are saying because people at Rolex do this for a living, so it is not possible for them to make a single bad design choice ?

Fair enough, I agree that the writing on the DSSD is not exactly what I would call attractive. To each his own I guess!

[springbar]

Originally Posted by acarriles

The fact that we choose to use the DSSD as a luxury item instead of as its intended function (diver's tool) does not make the design flawed.

The DSSD's intended function is as a luxury item.

Even if we were still in the era before dive computers, the DSSD isn't making a sensible design trade-off for a tool. It gives away a significant amount of dial area (and therefore readability in murky conditions) for a depth rating that serves no purpose.

A compromise like that is almost the antithesis of a "tool watch."

[Shibumi]

Originally Posted by FTX I

The 5mm extension (easylink) is a flaw IMO. Only Dr. Banner needs 5mm when he gets angry. Normal people need 2mm perhaps 3 but that's the max.

I disagree- I am not the Hulk by any means, I go 5'8" and about a buck sixty-five, and when I get hot my wrist goes from perfect on the short setting to perfect when I flip it- I can just fit a pinkie tip under it at both extremes...