Why did Rolex get rid of holes on the lugs?

[gerry100]

Did the lug holes accumulate grime
With daily wear?

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by gerry100

Did the lug holes accumulate grime
With daily wear?

No. They make removing bracelet significantly easier and require no special tools.

[joli160]

Because it looks ugly

[Roddypeepa]

My opinion is Tudor should do holes on heritage models asthey are strap heavy and look great: gmt, bb divers, pro, ranger etc and Rolex leave as is.

Personally, I feel as though their bracelets are industry gold standard and so you’re mad to take a modern Rolex off of a Rolex bracelet. Tried it, don’t like it. YMMV


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rolex1982]

I personally don’t like them. It looks much better without holes.

[shedlock2000]

I think they deleted them so it was harder to tell when they over-polished the lugs!

I prefer them too — I don’t really know that the watch looks somehow better without them; I suppose they look less finished.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tekno]

They made that change when their watches still looked like a Rolex. I assume they did it to clean up the lines, make them look more elegant. They added the SEL’s to all the sports watches around that time I think.

I assume it was to boost sales, in the late 80’s - early 2000’s all the watches looked about the same… there was a slump in sales from what I remember. You could get a new watch from the grey market for $500 under msrp in 2003-6. Back then the “grey market” were just some guys with connections to jewelry stores I think. Watches that weren’t moving would get sold out the back door at a discount. I bought a brand new Coke GMT box/papers for $4-4400 I think it was. I bought a Box papers new w/sticker on back 2001 year 16220 for about 3k around 2003/2004 or so.

I bet they were trying to make the watches new without changing them too much. Give people a reason to trade in their old watches.

Then the big watch trend hit and they tossed all that out the window. Maxi cases, maxi hands, ceramic bezels.

You may like the vintage forum more if you prefer holes & the way the watches were for 50 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[watchnwine]

I think they look dressier/nicer/more finished without holes... but holes throw off a tool watch vibe that I love. I'm searching for a holes watch right now.

[77T]

Originally Posted by Josunese1975

Why do you think Rolex got rid of them?

Too many dirty lugholes detracted from brand positioning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[HogwldFLTR]

When I was communicating through medium with Hans Wildorf he said he instructed the staff to stop making tool watches and start making fashion watches. That's why.

[destrodan]

Because exposed lug holes might cause a fashion watch to be embarrassingly identified by other well-heeled high-society fashion watches as a 'devil-may-care' rugged tool watch. A 14060m once told me that walking around with exposed lug holes is like attending an evening cocktail party with a mountain man's beard instead of a five o'clock shadow that's meticulously trimmed to the perfect designer-stubble length.

[Wssszsss]

The hole been removed because Rolex wanted to level up their sport watch from tool to luxury, just like royal oak and nautilus, to design the case and bracelet all together, not separate

[PenDelicate]

I think they look bad.

[alex.cicollo]

Easy solution…

[petay993]

When they made the transition from instruments to jewellery.

[joli160]

Originally Posted by petay993

When they made the transition from instruments to jewellery.

That was around 1945 when they made the first DJ in gold

[Ferrari308]

I think I prefer them, simply for the strap reason. Much easier to deal with. I would not dare try to change the bracelet on my Daytona - I would scratch the crap out of it. My DJ, Sub or OP - no problem at all.


PDG

[PenDelicate]

I don't get the "lug-holes left when Rolex went from tool-watches to jewelry" thread here.

Changing a strap is 99% of the time an aesthetic choice. And aesthetics is firmly in the jewelry-realm.

If you've a tool-watch, you find the most functional strap and never change it: it's doing its job.

So removing lug-holes makes it harder to change straps, which negatively affects aesthetic choice, which is a move away from the jewelry-realm and towards the tool-realm.

[goodolejr]

Because spring bars sticking out from over-polished lugs are a real buzzkill.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

They do today but funnily enough most Grand Seikos back in the 1960s and 1970s didn't have lug holes. They were mostly dressier back then, though.

Always great info Adam

Originally Posted by samson66

Strangely enough Rolex chooses to include them on some of their current Tudor models. I'm not sure what their rationale is.

I guess it’s an acknowledgment of a real tool watch requirement?

Originally Posted by goodolejr

Because spring bars sticking out from over-polished lugs are a real buzzkill.

If you file the spring bars halfway down they would probably still be more substantial than their modern counterparts.