In my humble opinion, Rolex gets one detail wrong on sports models

[Seibei]

I think Rolex gets this detail 100% right. If you want a metal crown you have plenty of models to choose from. A metal crown does however imho not suit most of the professional sports models. I actually think a metal crown would ruin a Submariner.

[WatchGuy1966]

Originally Posted by envuks

There’s one detail that I feel Rolex gets wrong on most spots models....

It’s the crown on the dial. I wish it was made of metal on the subs, gmts, etc like it is on the Daytona, OP models, and the rest of the model line.

I feel the dial isn’t all it could be with the Rolex crown printed on the dial rather that cast in WG or YG

Anyone else feel similar?

Totally Agree

[reb]

Originally Posted by Seibei

I think Rolex gets this detail 100% right. If you want a metal crown you have plenty of models to choose from. A metal crown does however imho not suit most of the professional sports models. I actually think a metal crown would ruin a Submariner.

Totally Agree
We have sports models and the other models.
At the other models, okay, but not in the sportys.

[|404|]

I think the applied metal crown should be on all their watches too...

It's actually what puts me off the Submariners.

On my Explorer, I don't think its necessary as its a very understated watch and that would make it draw more attention.

On my Sky-D it looks fantastic.

[MikeyV]

I love the gold cast crown on my DJ41. So I'd vote that way.

What they should do is replace the lume triangle at 12 o'clock with a lume filled crown.

That would be slick.

[Mystro]

Rolex keeps that for classic models. Bezel profesional models are more functional in nature.

[Cru Jones]

Don’t agree with this at all: having an applied crown right beneath the triangle with WG surround would be strange. The printed crown goes with the printed “Rolex” right beneath it.

[Onikage]

I love coronets as much as any man, but I don't want that.

[DoctorA]

I personally prefer the applied crown more! Makes it look richer!

[kauffee]

I’ve seen photoshops on here with the applied crown underneath the lumed triangle on a Submariner and it just looked wrong.

[douglasf13]

I long for the days when posters complained about the applied indices, rather than wanting MORE applied features. I knew it would happen when the 6-digit series arrived, but we've officially gone full jewelry around here. Never go full jewelry!

[lecorsaire]

No, this is the way they should be on the sports models. Printed dials for everything but the Daytona. It doesn't cheapen the watch one bit. I also think the gold surrounds on the indices are a good thing. I don't like the baked look on vintage dials with the indices expanding as if they were made of yeast.

[Laszlo]

Disagree. It’s a sports watch.

[frankfrazetta]

I want a holographic burger king paper crown that endlessly rotates. It would glow in the dark. Next, I think Rolex should put a small fission reactor in there somewhere and get rid of that stupid spring thingy. What hey, they should make a teeny tiny combustion engine and have a butane fueling port. Yeah, that's the ticket!

[mtasquared]

A raised coronet doesn't mean a Rolex isn't tough. The printed ones are just tougher.

[D O C]

No, no, no. I love that great big triangular lumed-up 12 o'clock marker. Putting the crown in place of it would ruin the classic high contrast look of the GMT2 and Submariner. Think about it.

Yes the Daytona is elegant with the crown at 12 o'clock. But I think it also creates a lower contrast and "busy" look to the dial. Makes it harder to read and actually tell time. Unless you're like Andy Warhol and just wearing as jewelry and for looks rather than as an actual timepiece.

Someone please photoshop the crown onto a Submariner and the 12 o'clock position and show us how horrible that would look.