The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Vintage Rolex Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 25 August 2012, 10:35 PM   #31
Mickey®
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Real Name: Mickey®
Location: Atlanta, GA
Watch: Swiss Made
Posts: 5,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Time Exposure View Post
For me, Vintage is "build it as best as we can." Contemporary is "build it as economically as we can." As it applies to Rolex? Perhaps not as clear. But check other examples: Valjoux 72 vs. 7736, Omega 321 vs. 861, etc. Each engineered to performance and reliability, but the latter built to economy. I just prefer the art (vintage) to the function (modern) in wrist watches.

Mickey® is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 August 2012, 11:14 PM   #32
ecsub44
"TRF" Member
 
ecsub44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: US
Watch: Sub
Posts: 3,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Time Exposure View Post
For me, Vintage is "build it as best as we can." Contemporary is "build it as economically as we can." As it applies to Rolex? Perhaps not as clear. But check other examples: Valjoux 72 vs. 7736, Omega 321 vs. 861, etc. Each engineered to performance and reliability, but the latter built to economy. I just prefer the art (vintage) to the function (modern) in wrist watches.
I like this one.
__________________
侘 寂 -- wabi-sabi -- acceptance of transience and imperfection by finding beauty in that which is imperfect, impermanent, and incomplete

Commissioner of WEIRD POLICE , Badge # ecsub44
ecsub44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 August 2012, 11:27 PM   #33
z32turbo
"TRF" Member
 
z32turbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sea Level
Watch: Varies
Posts: 6,877
I don't own any vintage watches but I really enjoyed reading this thread. Thanks guys!!!!

Love the photos in this forum!!

__________________


Instagram @z32turbo
z32turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 August 2012, 05:59 AM   #34
quito
"TRF" Member
 
quito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Mark
Location: New Jersey
Watch: 6590 BB
Posts: 146
Thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingair View Post
nice one !

Hagwe

hagwe2
quito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 August 2012, 01:13 PM   #35
oldbronco
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Watch: Ranger
Posts: 315
the Omega 30t2 movement won Swiss chronographic competitions with "only" 17 jewels. my Omegas with this movement keep time as well as any modern movement. likewise for my vintage Rolex watches. I'm not worried about total accuracy since my life won't change if I'm 10 seconds late. I have a 75 year old Bubble Back that keeps near chronographic time. I wonder if any of the modern movements will do the same 75 years from now.
vintage = quality, history, mystique, vastly better styling. modern = build as cheaply as possible, bling, image, ostentation for narcissists. I'm sorry if I have offended any modern
Rolex owners.
oldbronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 August 2012, 10:32 PM   #36
vintagewaferthin
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Earth
Watch: Air-King 5500
Posts: 2,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clay View Post
You ask:"can you tell me what the allure is of a working item that is not the most current available?"

First let me say that there in no offense what so ever taken...

But Anyone who has to ask that question has not the faintest idea of what the hobby is all about...

To the vintage watch collector and/or enthusiast, the watches speak to a time long gone by.
To a time when quality of craft was important and the "rule" rather then the exception!
To a time when Rolex made watches with a true purpose...
To a time when they were not meant for just the well-off to wear as jewelry, but for the professional to use in his or her daly life...
To own a vintage Rolex is to pay tribute, respect and homage to an era that we will likely never see again...

And if you add to that the fact that, for example, my 1977 1665 Sea Dweller keeps near perfect time (As well or better then any "modern" watch I own), and is capable of handling, on a daly basis, more then I would ever require it to.
Couple that with the fact that the vintage pieces, almost without exception, look far better then their modern brethren, you have your answer!
All of the reasons that you have stated are the same reasons that I love vintage watches. It truly is an era that will never be seen again and by owning our vintage pieces we can somewhat hold on to a piece of that era.
vintagewaferthin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 August 2012, 12:31 AM   #37
Vincent65
"TRF" Member
 
Vincent65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 14,298
Here are 2 reasons I prefer vintage:
Attached Images
   
Vincent65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 August 2012, 01:29 AM   #38
conrail
"TRF" Member
 
conrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,177
Exactly because of those engineering advancements/improvements is why I prefer vintage Rolex. New Rolex will never develop character, charm, patina, etc. They're making them bulletproof, which is great for a new watch, but new watches in 30 years will look pretty much how they do today - the paint won't turn from black to brown, the lume won't turn an eggshell or yellowish color.

Of course modern Rolex are beautiful machines, and I'd be happy owning one, but much prefer vintage. After all, it is just a hunk of steel on your wrist and you really just look at the dial/hands - so that is where the charm comes to me.
__________________
"Oh, you give a f****' aspirin a headache, pal!"
conrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 August 2012, 02:35 AM   #39
lhanddds
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Watch: of course
Posts: 8,429
Some great comments guys
lhanddds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 August 2012, 06:14 AM   #40
zeuloa
"TRF" Member
 
zeuloa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Jose
Location: Here
Watch: SEA-DWELLER
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by quito View Post


Great watches and nice name. Are you from Quito?
zeuloa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29 August 2012, 06:19 AM   #41
SPARTAN2161
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Nick H.
Location: Amherst, NY
Watch: me flip
Posts: 1,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clay View Post
You ask:"can you tell me what the allure is of a working item that is not the most current available?"

First let me say that there in no offense what so ever taken...

But Anyone who has to ask that question has not the faintest idea of what the hobby is all about...

To the vintage watch collector and/or enthusiast, the watches speak to a time long gone by.
To a time when quality of craft was important and the "rule" rather then the exception!
To a time when Rolex made watches with a true purpose...
To a time when they were not meant for just the well-off to wear as jewelry, but for the professional to use in his or her daly life...
To own a vintage Rolex is to pay tribute, respect and homage to an era that we will likely never see again...

And if you add to that the fact that, for example, my 1977 1665 Sea Dweller keeps near perfect time (As well or better then any "modern" watch I own), and is capable of handling, on a daly basis, more then I would ever require it to.
Couple that with the fact that the vintage pieces, almost without exception, look far better then their modern brethren, you have your answer!
x2 couldn't of said it better myself
SPARTAN2161 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 04:32 PM   #42
scott k
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Seal Beach, calif
Posts: 183
Hi I have a 1979 Gold GMT with a jubilee hidden clasp band.....black bezel and dial. I get many compliments,it seems to have smoother lines than my new Sub TT
scott k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 04:42 PM   #43
Zed Homme
"TRF" Member
 
Zed Homme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: usa
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 6,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy View Post
but being an Engineer, for an item I use every day I always strive to have the most efficient mechanism available. That includes my watch. I always want to have a product that is the "latest and greatest" and that's why I am not attracted to vintage watches.
I'm getting a little caught up on this Paul. If that were truly your outlook, you wouldn't be wasting your time with mechanical watches, you'd be wearing quartz.

I'm not a vintage guy, but apprieciate it for the points mentioned by others here. I wonder how many more years have to go by before my 14060 (non M), seadweller, or 16610LV would be considered vintage.
Zed Homme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 06:52 PM   #44
buffy
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sweden
Watch: 1680
Posts: 188
Well according to me, the vintage subs look better then the new ones!
And if you going to look at it every day this matter as much or more then the specification of the caliber! You can see it as a very important functional requirement from engineering perspective!
buffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 06:52 PM   #45
buffy
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sweden
Watch: 1680
Posts: 188
Double post.......
buffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 07:17 PM   #46
Kiwinz
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Real Name: Mario
Location: USA / NZ
Watch: All sorts
Posts: 799
From a Mechanic's point of view..

the good old hand made craftsman ship is hard to beat, nothing against the new, I like it too, but the old shapes and simplicity and accuracy is unbetable.

Time has proofed that these movements just keep going and going even without services.
Kiwinz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 07:31 PM   #47
Flyjet601
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: All of them
Posts: 2,789
My 1984 GMT has kept better time than any of my modern Rolex that I have owned. So they must have done something right.
And as you see Rolex marketing over the decades has changed. It used to be outdoors, exploring, rugged......
Now it's sipping wine watching opera, equestrian or tennis.
Different market...

It's purely emotional.....lot logical
__________________
I used to be indecisive, now I'm not sure
Flyjet601 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 08:00 PM   #48
Puffy
"TRF" Member
 
Puffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 12,485
i like the old ones the best, have more character, but i also take the liberty to apply some modern day engineering. vintage meets modern, or vice versa. best of both worlds.







__________________
Fine Quality is Long Remembered After the Pain of Spending Money is Forgotten
Puffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 August 2012, 11:00 PM   #49
Cmaster03
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 167
Great question, not offended at all.

I think it boils down to aesthetics and history and character for most of us. Most vintage Rolex lovers love the tool watch era in general because the watches were expensive but actually made for a professional purpose back then. Today they are wonderful jewelry. It's a different purpose they're made for, and Rolex had to adapt to survive in the quartz and now cell phone era. They are luxury items today as well as being jewelry.

From an engineering standpoint consider this: although sapphire crystals confer superior scratch and water resistance...they are actually more susceptible to catastrophic failure (breaking) than the old acrylic (plastic) crystals. Is this REALLY an improvement? It is more for aesthetic reasons I think today, but I submit the 70s era Subs and Sea Dwellers had plenty of water resistance for actual real-world use for both recreational and professional divers. The later sapphire crystals scratched less, (which yes, some divers had asked for to prevent their $200 dive watches from getting too beat up looking !) but now your "tool watch" might have its crystal shatter if dropped on the tile floor of your bathroom.

But I digress. I think the reason most of us really love them today is their (perceived) soul and character. They just look cool.
Cmaster03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 September 2012, 12:52 AM   #50
JP Chestnut
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ann Arbor MI
Watch: Rolex Ref 16600
Posts: 3,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puffy View Post
i like the old ones the best, have more character, but i also take the liberty to apply some modern day engineering. vintage meets modern, or vice versa. best of both worlds.
I can understand why you would do that. However, I really wish that Rolex had continued to use the Oyster pattern on these new clasps.
JP Chestnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 September 2012, 02:08 AM   #51
jrmca
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Manchester, MA
Watch: Datejust 16013
Posts: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poorsod View Post
If efficiency is all you seek, then the quartz watch is cheaper, more reliable and more accurate than any mechanical watch. Today, the realm of the mechanical watch is more about aesthetics. Some of us like the aesthetics of a vintage piece.
I couldn't agree more. Most quartz watches are more accurate, efficient, and require almost no maintenance save for a cheap battery change every 3-5 years. Mechanical watch technology is pretty much obsolete from a purely functional and efficiency standpoint. Intricately crafted automatic timepieces are about artistry, craftsmanship, and tradition. My 32 year old Datejust keeps excellent time and looks like new and I always make a point to tell people who compliment my watch that it is that old. They seem to appreciate it even more and it is a real testiment to it's quality. I wear mechanical watches and vintage watches for the same reason I don't have vinyl siding on my house. There are definately more efficient options but to me nothing compares to quality workmanship.
jrmca is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10 September 2012, 12:14 AM   #52
vintagewaferthin
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Earth
Watch: Air-King 5500
Posts: 2,620
Rolex or not, vintage watches are just so much cooler than their modern counterparts. You can't just walk into an ad and buy a piece of history, you have to hunt for it.
vintagewaferthin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10 September 2012, 01:17 AM   #53
conrail
"TRF" Member
 
conrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Boston
Posts: 3,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagewaferthin View Post
Rolex or not, vintage watches are just so much cooler than their modern counterparts. You can't just walk into an ad and buy a piece of history, you have to hunt for it.
__________________
"Oh, you give a f****' aspirin a headache, pal!"
conrail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10 September 2012, 01:58 AM   #54
jluger
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Real Name: Henry
Location: NM, USA
Watch: 6694; 6424
Posts: 115
I just joined this forum specifically because I like vintage. I shave with straight razors made many decades before I was born, some of which I restored and honed myself. Why? Soul, history, energy.

All my views on this have been expressed by previous posters, but I want history, memories, and to have things that remind me of the goals and ideals I had when I was young.
jluger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches

OCWatches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.