ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Vanessa CW21 · 2 July 2015, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

So you are happy to say that cycling the rapid date change at say 11.50pm for 60 days would have no chance of stripping any of the calendar ring teeth?

Yes, go ahead. You will not do any damage.

Sent from my SM-G920T1 using Tapatalk

Boxcars · 2 July 2015, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanessa CW21

Yes, go ahead. You will not do any damage.

Sent from my SM-G920T1 using Tapatalk

I'm really surprised that a person of your experience would advocate that. But I'll leave it there for now

Vanessa CW21 · 2 July 2015, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

I'm really surprised that a person of your experience would advocate that. But I'll leave it there for now

I'm not advocating anything, I'm just answering your question.
Let me clarify my answer; You will not do any damage to your date indicator if you quickset it at 11:55/56/57/58/59, 12:00/01/02/03/04 or ANY other minute of the day.

A person of my experience can say that with confidence.... What are your credentials? Where did you go to watchmaking school, and how many years of experience working on Rolex movements do you have?

Mr.Black · 2 July 2015, 02:02 PM

Where's the "I'm staying out of the way with a bag of popcorn, a pen and a notepad" smiley when you need one.

crowncollection · 2 July 2015, 03:05 PM

thanks for clarifying vanessa that was what i thought

GradyPhilpott · 2 July 2015, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

But I'll leave it there for now

Excellent idea.

MonBK · 2 July 2015, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

I'm really surprised that a person of your experience would advocate that. But I'll leave it there for now

Quote:

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Excellent idea.

Not a minute too soon and a good idea while you're behind.

Boxcars · 2 July 2015, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanessa CW21

I'm not advocating anything, I'm just answering your question.
Let me clarify my answer; You will not do any damage to your date indicator if you quickset it at 11:55/56/57/58/59, 12:00/01/02/03/04 or ANY other minute of the day.

A person of my experience can say that with confidence.... What are your credentials? Where did you go to watchmaking school, and how many years of experience working on Rolex movements do you have?

I haven't suggested that the date indicator would be damaged either.

I will PM you later.

breitlings · 2 July 2015, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

11pm to 6am is the time to avoid IIRC.

Right on most other brands wrong on rolex. There is a reason for the quickset date and it's not the instant flip but the safety in setting the watch at any time. Vanessa has said it as has other people that you should be listening to IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

Keep digging. Or just admit you were wrong in trying to be smart.

I recall this post fondly now lol.

Vanessa CW21 · 2 July 2015, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

So you are happy to say that cycling the rapid date change at say 11.50pm for 60 days would have no chance of stripping any of the calendar ring teeth?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

I haven't suggested that the date indicator would be damaged either.

I will PM you later.

What's a "calendar ring" then? It's difficult to discuss parts when made-up names are used.

Boxcars · 2 July 2015, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanessa CW21

What's a "calendar ring" then? It's difficult to discuss parts when made-up names are used.

Sorry, you are right. I will PM you tomorrow, I need to get some sleep :)

Andad · 2 July 2015, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

So you are happy to say that cycling the rapid date change at say 11.50pm for 60 days would have no chance of stripping any of the calendar ring teeth?

You are becoming notorious for your bad information.

I suggest you do more research prior to posting.

Continuing with this pointless debate is not doing you any good.

Take care.

southtexas · 3 July 2015, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

Sorry, you are right. I will PM you tomorrow, I need to get some sleep :)

Why the need for a PM? Seems like the discussion is moving right along here in this thread?

crowncollection · 3 July 2015, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

Sorry, you are right. I will PM you tomorrow, I need to get some sleep :)

Best to just admit you were wrong you look less foolish IMHO we can all be wrong sometimes cheers

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Knappo 1307 · 3 July 2015, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crowncollection

Best to just admit you were wrong you look less foolish IMHO we can all be wrong sometimes cheers

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're the best David. Cheers my friend!

crowncollection · 3 July 2015, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

You're the best David. Cheers my friend!

Cheers Jason

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vanessa CW21 · 3 July 2015, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by southtexas

Why the need for a PM? Seems like the discussion is moving right along here in this thread?

I'm still waiting for the pm...

crowncollection · 3 July 2015, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanessa CW21

I'm still waiting for the pm...

Don't hold your breath Vanessa lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vanessa CW21 · 3 July 2015, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crowncollection

Don't hold your breath Vanessa lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not. Rofl

Sent from my SM-G920T1 using Tapatalk

Presa canary · 3 July 2015, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanessa CW21

I'm still waiting for the pm...

Busy stripping his calendar ring teeth....

GradyPhilpott · 3 July 2015, 02:09 PM

I think that the Dunning–Kruger effect would apply to this thread.

subtona · 3 July 2015, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonBK

Instead of posting sarcastic comments I advice you to study up on the different Rolex movements.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I think that the Dunning–Kruger effect would apply to this thread.

hdrazor251 · 3 July 2015, 03:49 PM

If you find you have dug yourself into a hole........................
.
.
.
.
.
....stop digging!

crowncollection · 3 July 2015, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I think that the Dunning–Kruger effect would apply to this thread.

Agree +++

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Old Expat Beast · 3 July 2015, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I think that the Dunning–Kruger effect would apply to this thread.

There's a lot of it about.

cedargrove · 3 July 2015, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxcars

You are wrong, but ok then.

Dude, you got owned.

TheBluePrince · 3 July 2015, 09:32 PM

Errrr back to topic?!?

The latest 3135 clones accept any and all genuine Rolex 3135 parts so a very keen eye is needed to spot them if they have been modified in this way.

kilyung · 3 July 2015, 09:45 PM

This was the funniest post I've read on TRF in long time.

RollieVerde · 4 July 2015, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanessa CW21

I'm not advocating anything, I'm just answering your question.
Let me clarify my answer; You will not do any damage to your date indicator if you quickset it at 11:55/56/57/58/59, 12:00/01/02/03/04 or ANY other minute of the day.

A person of my experience can say that with confidence.... What are your credentials? Where did you go to watchmaking school, and how many years of experience working on Rolex movements do you have?

V, you are the best. Thanks for answering this question (which some are trying to turn into whentosetthedategate) but beware: with the claims that Rolex is (allegedly) saying that you can now go ten years before servicing, I predict a maelstrom of opinions and, ultimately, arguments. I myself have never seen an official statement by Rolex on an exact timeline when you should service your watch, especially in the manuals that come with them upon purchase. All I've got in the manuals that came with mine is the term "periodically." I think you've made the point many times that servicing is critical for long life and accuracy, but I feel the waters will get muddied on the forum front with the new longer warranty and such. Crazy times.

subtona · 4 July 2015, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RollieVerde

V, you are the best. Thanks for answering this question (which some are trying to turn into whentosetthedategate) but beware: with the claims that Rolex is (allegedly) saying that you can now go ten years before servicing, I predict a maelstrom of opinions and, ultimately, arguments. I myself have never seen an official statement by Rolex on an exact timeline when you should service your watch, especially in the manuals that come with them upon purchase. All I've got in the manuals that came with mine is the term "periodically." I think you've made the point many times that servicing is critical for long life and accuracy, but I feel the waters will get muddied on the forum front with the new longer warranty and such. Crazy times.

If you don't service it in time and a little bitty part wears out, then it is replaced.

If a bunch of little bitty parts wear out then you replace a bunch of little bitty parts.

Not sure where this becomes a big deal?

2 July 2015, 03:05 PM	#35
crowncollection "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: David Location: australia Posts: 20,216	thanks for clarifying vanessa that was what i thought __________________ watches many

3 July 2015, 02:09 PM	#51
GradyPhilpott 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: New Mexico Watch: Seiko #SRK050 Posts: 34,460	I think that the Dunning–Kruger effect would apply to this thread. __________________ JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner

3 July 2015, 03:49 PM	#53
hdrazor251 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Jeff Location: Arizona Watch: is recovered!! Posts: 4,255	If you find you have dug yourself into a hole........................ . . . . . ....stop digging! __________________ 16753 GMT Master, 16613 Bluesy, 16710 GMT Master II, 16570 Polar Explorer II-Stolen & Recovered!! Card Carrying Member of the Global Assoc. of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

2 July 2015, 02:02 PM	#34
Mr.Black "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Real Name: Mr. Black Location: Ohio Watch: Rolex Posts: 112	Where's the "I'm staying out of the way with a bag of popcorn, a pen and a notepad" smiley when you need one.

3 July 2015, 09:32 PM	#57
TheBluePrince "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: London Posts: 2,081	Errrr back to topic?!? The latest 3135 clones accept any and all genuine Rolex 3135 parts so a very keen eye is needed to spot them if they have been modified in this way.

3 July 2015, 09:45 PM	#58
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	This was the funniest post I've read on TRF in long time.

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