Most legible Daytona?

[spikep]

Originally Posted by dan993

wish i could get one on my wrist to at least give an informed opinion

amen

[ngypheap]

Originally Posted by garyk

Excellent, I’m psyched to see yours when it’s done!

Hope it will look good when it come back..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by swish77

Well, in bright light, it's easy to tell the time! It's low light that's often the problem, but the same could be said for a lot of watches.

I'll admit it can be a little annoying at times, but the trade-off is worth it. Just feels and looks so good on the wrist.

To me, Personally Platinum dial YM was much harder to tell time on in bright light. The dial was beautiful but for some reason it didn't have much contrast.

Daytona I think is pretty legible for a chronograph. I wonder how many people who find the daytona hard to read, own and like other chronos?

[XFi1382]

Originally Posted by swish77

None of the modern Daytonas are great for legibility. That's just not their strong point, especially in low light (still beautiful/cool, though).

I've owned both the white and black Daytona-Cs (twice each) and the WG Daytona on Oysterflex (twice). Of those three, the best for legibility for me, in order: WG, white and black.

I now own a black 16520 and white/silver 6263, both of which have better legibility than modern Daytonas for some reason. Something to do with the design of the hands and the sub-dials. What's surprising is that even though it's smaller, the old 6263 has the best legibility of any of them.

Hard to beat the 6263 IMO. I think it's the full black sub dials. Your timepiece in in exquisite condition by the way! One of my grails for sure

[Juan Luis]

Originally Posted by breitlings

To me, Personally Platinum dial YM was much harder to tell time on in bright light. The dial was beautiful but for some reason it didn't have much contrast.

Daytona I think is pretty legible for a chronograph. I wonder how many people who find the daytona hard to read, own and like other chronos?

I will eventually own one again. As for chronographs. My Omega Speedmaster is one of the most legible watches I have ever owned, period.

[Juan Luis]

Originally Posted by garyk

It’s funny all the opinions on Daytona’s but this is a very interesting thread with all these different versions!

Thanks!
And everyone for posting.

[garyk]

Originally Posted by breitlings

To me, Personally Platinum dial YM was much harder to tell time on in bright light. The dial was beautiful but for some reason it didn't have much contrast.

Daytona I think is pretty legible for a chronograph. I wonder how many people who find the daytona hard to read, own and like other chronos?

I have multiple Chronographs and some are easier to read. One of my favs is my Porsche design PVD black Chrono made by IWC from 1975. Being a total nerd, I got the watch, a pair of Porsche Design Carrera sunglasses and eventually a 78 911SC Targa all in the late 70s. Still have the watch lol...

[garyk]

Been serviced twice since new but I wouldn’t let them touch the case or bracelet.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[willywatch]

Any watch that gives problems to read the time,is a bad watch in my
opinion.And this is why the Daytona is about the only Rolex i would
never own.We are talking about Rolex here,not some run of the mill
brand.It is a design fault that would be totally unacceptable if it was
another brand that made a watch like this.The least we can accept is
a watch that everybody can read in a glance.

[garyk]

Originally Posted by willywatch

Any watch that gives problems to read the time,is a bad watch in my
opinion.And this is why the Daytona is about the only Rolex i would
never own.We are talking about Rolex here,not some run of the mill
brand.It is a design fault that would be totally unacceptable if it was
another brand that made a watch like this.The least we can accept is
a watch that everybody can read in a glance.

Lol...guess I’m just crazy then....crazy for the 3 Daytona’s I’ve owned and one more on the way. Btw, I used Daytona’s in studios during commercial production for two decades. To all of you who make these definitive statements about Daytona’s...possibly you don’t understand the purpose of an actual tool watch.

[subtona]

Submariner or gmt.

If it must have 3 subdials...speedy.

[brian628]

Here are pix of my mod Daytonas that I like to switch around occasionally.
To me, the racing dials are the most legible - and the ceramic bezel increases the contrast of both dials.

In the minority here, but I'm not a fan of stick dials, the old school thin hands, or metal bezels. In particular, I find the 116500 black/black to be painfully lame. I'm also not afraid to mod my keeper-watches, which also seems to drive most people ape sh-t. Not sure I get it, but whatev floats one's boat.....

[GoingPlaces]

Black dials are always the easiest to read IMO.

[Chester01]

Originally Posted by swish77

None of the modern Daytonas are great for legibility. That's just not their strong point, especially in low light (still beautiful/cool, though).

I've owned both the white and black Daytona-Cs (twice each) and the WG Daytona on Oysterflex (twice). Of those three, the best for legibility for me, in order: WG, white and black.

I now own a black 16520 and white/silver 6263, both of which have better legibility than modern Daytonas for some reason. Something to do with the design of the hands and the sub-dials. What's surprising is that even though it's smaller, the old 6263 has the best legibility of any of them.

This one! Note how the subdials are not very reflective and actually have enough hash marks on the subdials to be read accurately.

[subtona]

Can we agree legibility is related to the contrast of hands to dial?

[Maiden]

There is a legible Daytona?

[GoingPlaces]

Originally Posted by subtona

can we agree legibility is related to the contrast of hands to dial?

100%.

[101031-28]

The subdials make it look busier but I would say this one for me

[garyk]

As an owner of Daytonas, not having experienced being unable to see the time, I would not known there was a perceived problem had I not read it here?!

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by garyk

Been serviced twice since new but I wouldn’t let them touch the case or bracelet.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That is in great shape! Looks a bit like a sinn or bell & ross.

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by 101031-28

The subdials make it look busier but I would say this one for me

a beauty!

[breitlings]

Originally Posted by brian628

Here are pix of my mod Daytonas that I like to switch around occasionally.
To me, the racing dials are the most legible - and the ceramic bezel increases the contrast of both dials.

In the minority here, but I'm not a fan of stick dials, the old school thin hands, or metal bezels. In particular, I find the 116500 black/black to be painfully lame. I'm also not afraid to mod my keeper-watches, which also seems to drive most people ape sh-t. Not sure I get it, but whatev floats one's boat.....

looks good!

[DonRickles]

They get easier to read, the more you wear them.

[garyk]

Originally Posted by breitlings

That is in great shape! Looks a bit like a sinn or bell & ross.

It does but pre dates them I think. This is from 1975 originally. I knew the rep and he sold it to me a couple years later.

[77T]

Originally Posted by garyk

Been serviced twice since new but I wouldn’t let them touch the case or bracelet.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I like your PD, but like red hands better.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[BigAppleBill]

Originally Posted by swish77

None of the modern Daytonas are great for legibility. That's just not their strong point, especially in low light (still beautiful/cool, though).

I've owned both the white and black Daytona-Cs (twice each) and the WG Daytona on Oysterflex (twice). Of those three, the best for legibility for me, in order: WG, white and black.

I now own a black 16520 and white/silver 6263, both of which have better legibility than modern Daytonas for some reason. Something to do with the design of the hands and the sub-dials. What's surprising is that even though it's smaller, the old 6263 has the best legibility of any of them.

Aaron,
You know that 6263 is my grail Daytona. I’m expecting a PM from you someday when you’re ready to sell/trade.

[garyk]

Originally Posted by 77T

I like your PD, but like red hands better.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Haha, that’s pretty good. I had to look at this for a little bit!

[willywatch]

Originally Posted by garyk

Lol...guess I’m just crazy then....crazy for the 3 Daytona’s I’ve owned and one more on the way. Btw, I used Daytona’s in studios during commercial production for two decades. To all of you who make these definitive statements about Daytona’s...possibly you don’t understand the purpose of an actual tool watch.

No maybe i do not,i have only been writing about watches for 50 years LOL.
I am not saying it is a ugly watch,in fact quite the opposite.
But it is not a easy watch to read for a chronograph,and in my
eyes,that is not a good thing for any watch.Of course you will defend the
watch you own.But i know many people who have not bought the Daytona
because of this reason.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by GoingPlaces

Black dials are always the easiest to read IMO.

Interesting but that wasn't my experience what so ever. I've two lighter dials and owned a black dialed Daytona; the black dialed one was much harder to read.

[VonSomething]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Interesting but that wasn't my experience what so ever. I've two lighter dials and owned a black dialed Daytona; the black dialed one was much harder to read.

Agree 100%. Black dials are harder to read and I have great vision. My champagne dial with golden hands is nearly impossible