Thoughts About The Cyclops Change

[FritzW]

I was thinking/reasoning about why Rolex have been changing (albiet intermittently) the mag on the cyclops. Could it possibly be that since the are using AF on the cyclops and its easier to read w/o a glare, they have decided the reduced mag may look better than the larger? I'll be honest, I have a smaller mag on my 2013 BLNR and while I was contemplating having it changed only because it wasnt "traditional", I am really quite fine with it now. The date is still very readable. The SDDS has no cyclops (I assume because of convex cyrstal) and I would have a very trying time to try to read that.

With that said, does anyone know if the switch in cyclops mag coincides with when when they started AR-ing the cyplops?


Not that Rolex will never give an answer to why as they answer to no one.

Any thoughts on this (other than it was a mistake by the vendor)?

[beer]

being a cynical person i think it is more along the lines that rolex already had had many leave the factory by the time they found out there were some
defective models and so simply changed the goalposts (change the official spec on their website) rather than admitting error and having to recall tens of thousands of watches

[FritzW]

Originally Posted by beer

being a cynical person i think it is more along the lines that rolex already had had many leave the factory by the time they found out there were some
defective models and so simply changed the goalposts (change the official spec on their website) rather than admitting error and having to recall tens of thousands of watches

True, however, the lower mag has been out for quite sometime. I think i remember see this topic as far back as ten years ago - at least last 5 yrs- and there are still watches in ADs as we speak. I would think the current ones with lower mags have been produced with in the last year or so. Certainly they aren't several years old (ones produced with the "wrong batch" of mags). I would also think error would have been notice almost immediately and didnt take Rolex years to discover. Anyone know roughly how long before a watch leaves the factory to when it is sold?

[Old Expat Beast]

I don't think they would be replacing crystals on request, like they have been, if it was the new normal.

[RolexguyinSF]

Originally Posted by beer

being a cynical person i think it is more along the lines that rolex already had had many leave the factory by the time they found out there were some
defective models and so simply changed the goalposts (change the official spec on their website) rather than admitting error and having to recall tens of thousands of watches

I really believe this is exactly what has happened. And, if true, I have lost respect for Rolex as a brand. There is really no excuse for this mistake.

Would AP, or Patek Philippe ever make a mistake like this? I doubt it. And even if they did I imagine it would be an immediate recall with apologies. For Rolex to error, then realize the mistake, go on their own web site and erase the 2.5x magnification spec. and then say "mistake, what mistake?" is really lame.

Shame on them (and I am a huge Rolex fan, who only wears their watches).

[FritzW]

That makes perfect sense, but what I don't understand, is how can there still be Rolexs still in ADs if they haven't been using smaller mags for years. They couldnt have been unsold for several years.

[FritzW]

Originally Posted by RolexguyinSF

I really believe this is exactly what has happened. And, if true, I have lost respect for Rolex as a brand. There is really no excuse for this mistake.

Would AP, or Patek Philippe ever make a mistake like this? I doubt it. And even if they did I imagine it would be an immediate recall with apologies. For Rolex to error, then realize the mistake, go on their own web site and erase the 2.5x magnification spec. and then say "mistake, what mistake?" is really lame.

Shame on them (and I am a huge Rolex fan, who only wears their watches).

Yes, it seems they as if they've been caught with there had in the cookie jar.
But I'm just pondering.

Still though- why are there STILL watches out there being sold.
Does anyone know how long before a watch leaves that factory to when it is sold ? 5 years in at an AD showcase doesn't add up.

[AS1]

Originally Posted by beer

being a cynical person i think it is more along the lines that rolex already had had many leave the factory by the time they found out there were some
defective models and so simply changed the goalposts (change the official spec on their website) rather than admitting error and having to recall tens of thousands of watches

I tend to feel the same. it's the inconsistency of what comes out of the factory that is so maddening!

[GB-man]

It's a sad quality control defect that should have never left the factory as obvious as it is. The reason behind it is lack of attention to detail in QC.

[R Douglas]

1 - Could be a spec change and Rolex is addressing some of the people that don't like the new magnification by replacing the crystal.

2 - Rolex realized they had out of spec magnification and installed them anyway playing the odds of most people will do nothing about it.

I'm thinking it's more like scenario number 1

[locutus49]

The biggest mystery of the 21st Century.

[Syed117]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I don't think they would be replacing crystals on request, like they have been, if it was the new normal.

I feel the same way. A company known for being stubborn and ruthless when it comes to controlling everything would never bend if this was normal.

Originally Posted by GB-man

It's a sad quality control defect that should have never left the factory as obvious as it is. The reason behind it is lack of attention to detail in QC.

Yeah.

[RichM]

To the OP, I myself could probably have lived with the lower mag on my YM if it was my only Rolex with a cyclops. When you have multiple watched with dates it becomes a problem.

It wasn't until I set it down next to my SUB that I realized it was smaller.

If this was the new norm, then I don't know why Rolex keeps replacing them, nor do I think we will ever know.

At least my three look similar to each other. I think my BLNR is still slightly smaller than my SUB and YM but it's OK for now.

[FritzW]

Its a head scratch-er

[XZACM102]

Shame on Rolex.
The 2.5X mag way and the Rolex way are obviously not the same anymore.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I don't think they would be replacing crystals on request, like they have been, if it was the new normal.

Exactly

Originally Posted by R Douglas

1 - Could be a spec change and Rolex is addressing some of the people that don't like the new magnification by replacing the crystal.

2 - Rolex realized they had out of spec magnification and installed them anyway playing the odds of most people will do nothing about it.

I'm thinking it's more like scenario number 1

I doubt #1
If it was a spec change, and now Rolex is producing watches with cyclops as intended, why would they spend the time and money changing the cyclops? Doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.
And why would any new Rolex watches have a cyclops with mag that's 2.5x?

I think the real explanation is a bad batch (or batches) of cyclops that's making it's way through production.
Considering they state it takes "a year" to make a Rolex, it may take a while for that batch (or batches) to be exhausted.

[Sublover2166]

It is clearly a major flub up in quality control from the vendor who makes the crystals/Cyclops. What is even the point of having a Cyclops if it barely magnifies the date. It is sad that Rolex has remained mum on this issue, but they obviously have too much to lose if they admitted this as a QC flub.

[VinnieVegas]

Originally Posted by beer

being a cynical person i think it is more along the lines that rolex already had had many leave the factory by the time they found out there were some
defective models and so simply changed the goalposts (change the official spec on their website) rather than admitting error and having to recall tens of thousands of watches

We're of like mind.

[Danex]

Originally Posted by eonflux

Exactly







I doubt #1

If it was a spec change, and now Rolex is producing watches with cyclops as intended, why would they spend the time and money changing the cyclops? Doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.

And why would any new Rolex watches have a cyclops with mag that's 2.5x?



I think the real explanation is a bad batch (or batches) of cyclops that's making it's way through production.

Considering they state it takes "a year" to make a Rolex, it may take a while for that batch (or batches) to be exhausted.

Agree.
Given their mfg volume and JIT (just in time) sourcing, there was nothing they could do but ship the watches with the inferior cyclops. I believe the crystal/cyclops is one of the few parts they out source.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk while driving down the interstate at 75 mph

[busytimmy]

Originally Posted by VinnieVegas

We're of like mind.

Same here