ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

john_nch · 7 February 2015, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHRONOLEX

By the way, RSC still has my BLNR for warranty crystal replacement. Haven't seen or heard for three weeks.

Yikes!

Maybe all the influx of warranty crystal replacement requests have bombarded their capacity?

Chute · 7 February 2015, 02:31 PM

Who knows, maybe the poor magnifier watches will be collectors items someday

Exhausted · 7 February 2015, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chute

Who knows, maybe the poor magnifier watches will be collectors items someday

That has crossed my mind too...

Danex · 7 February 2015, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chute

Who knows, maybe the poor magnifier watches will be collectors items someday

Not likely imho. Too many of them and the "error" actually detracts from the watch.

Rags · 7 February 2015, 02:44 PM

This should be a major recall. Many of these watches don't look like they have a 2.5x magnification.

viper9669 · 7 February 2015, 02:51 PM

Do get it fixed at RSC, the magnification is not up to factory standards.

Mystro · 8 February 2015, 03:40 AM

Just keep in mind to test the accuracy/regulation of any new watch. I know the lack of quality control cosmetic issue has been running rampant lately with Rolex but make sure any new watch you get is keeping good time.

Exhausted · 8 February 2015, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystro

Just keep in mind to test the accuracy/regulation of any new watch. I know the lack of quality control cosmetic issue has been running rampant lately with Rolex but make sure any new watch you get is keeping good time.

Any specific way to do this or just run it through a 24 hour cycle?

Exhausted · 8 February 2015, 05:11 AM

Just an update. All the staff at my AD were blown away. Offered me an exchange or to replace date wheel...no hassles at all.

Danex · 8 February 2015, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exhausted

Just an update. All the staff at my AD were blown away. Offered me an exchange or to replace date wheel...no hassles at all.

Replace date wheel?

Hope you are getting a new watch.

Exhausted · 8 February 2015, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danex

Replace date wheel?

Hope you are getting a new watch.

Sure am

Mystro · 8 February 2015, 07:38 AM

Great dealer service. Remember to take your time looking over the new watch. Take a magnifying glass to make it easier. NOTHING should be taken for granite with a new Rolex delivery.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exhausted

Sure am

wolffram · 8 February 2015, 08:20 AM

Went to 2 ADs here in Melbourne yesterday looking for a Polar to buy. Both had one in stock. One was perfect, the other sat there proudly displaying it's low mag cyclops. Couldn't point this out to the dealer though - they wouldn't even take it out of the case for me to look at it

FIrst AD I've been to that really looked down their nose at me

Oh well, the jokes on them as they had the dud Polar

wolffram · 8 February 2015, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystro

Great dealer service. Remember to take your time looking over the new watch. Take a magnifying glass to make it easier. NOTHING should be taken for granite with a new Rolex delivery.

When I bought my sub, my wife asked me if I was going to have a close look at it, like I minutely examined every other watch I bought. I told her no, because It's a Rolex, so nothing could be wrong

Eric Chan · 9 February 2015, 08:10 AM

Was at an AD last week and they had two 116713's with the same cyclops issue. Let's hope future Rolex watches will not have this issue.

qyk1010101 · 30 April 2015, 04:23 AM

My RSC said that they have gotten confirmation from Geneva that this is the new normal. Even took out a few new subs to prove to me (indeed all of them had the same low mag).

I suspect that models that are harder to move like the 116613 might still have large mag vs the newer SS subs.

cloudplay · 30 April 2015, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qyk1010101

My RSC said that they have gotten confirmation from Geneva that this is the new normal. Even took out a few new subs to prove to me (indeed all of them had the same low mag).

But what is the new normal? No mag, as for the OPs Explorer, 1.5x or some random result between 1x and 2.5x? I'm waiting for a BLNR ordered at an AD, which I thought would go nicely with the wife's SS Daytona - but this is starting to turn me off.

DocJekl · 30 April 2015, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qyk1010101

My RSC said that they have gotten confirmation from Geneva that this is the new normal. Even took out a few new subs to prove to me (indeed all of them had the same low mag).

I suspect that models that are harder to move like the 116613 might still have large mag vs the newer SS subs.

Well, the new normal looks terrible. And low mag was one sure fire way to spot a fake in the past, but no more. (although more recent fakes have 2.5x mag now, so I guess it's going to be reversed and fakes will have the proper mag, but not real ones).

My Exp II 216570 from Nov 2014 has the proper magnification.

jackreacher · 30 April 2015, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DocJekl

And low mag was one sure fire way to spot a fake in the past, but no more. (although more recent fakes have 2.5x mag now, so I guess it's going to be reversed and fakes will have the proper mag, but not real ones).

Yep, so now, if your brand new Rolex:

1) has a cyclops with a high ('normal') mag,
2) has an etched crown on the rehaut that lines up exactly with the 12 o'clock marker,
3) has a rotating ceramic bezel that lines up exactly with the 12 marker....

you have a fake

Cru Jones · 30 April 2015, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackreacher

Yep, so now, if your brand new Rolex:

1) has a cyclops with a high ('normal') mag,
2) has an etched crown on the rehaut that lines up exactly with the 12 o'clock marker,
3) has a rotating ceramic bezel that lines up exactly with the 12 marker....

you have a fake

cht · 1 May 2015, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackreacher

Yep, so now, if your brand new Rolex:

1) has a cyclops with a high ('normal') mag,
2) has an etched crown on the rehaut that lines up exactly with the 12 o'clock marker,
3) has a rotating ceramic bezel that lines up exactly with the 12 marker....

you have a fake

Oh no he didn't!

cht · 1 May 2015, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qyk1010101

My RSC said that they have gotten confirmation from Geneva that this is the new normal. Even took out a few new subs to prove to me (indeed all of them had the same low mag).

I suspect that models that are harder to move like the 116613 might still have large mag vs the newer SS subs.

This CAN"T be true....no way.

Agree, what's the point of putting a cyclops on then?

If they are going to take the time to apply an AR coated cyclops, and you could apply one that magnifies 2.5x or you could apply one that barely does jack sh*t, which would you pick if you were in charge?

There is so much misinformation reguarding this topic from AD's to RSC to Geneve, who the f*ck knows anymore.

This is just a royal complete eff up and disappointing for a brand with a previous reputation to commitment to excellence.
:(
I'm pretty sure and others agree, the took delivery of a large shipment of crystals with defective cyclops and affixed them to thousands of watches before noticied.
Instead of admitted they screwed up, they are sweeping it under the rug, and only replacing those who know the difference.

Mr DateJust · 20 August 2015, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qyk1010101

My RSC said that they have gotten confirmation from Geneva that this is the new normal. Even took out a few new subs to prove to me (indeed all of them had the same low mag).

I suspect that models that are harder to move like the 116613 might still have large mag vs the newer SS subs.

I don't buy what the RSC told you. Many members have sent their watches in and had the crystal changed over. If this was the new normal why would they be changing them or have they stopped doing this?

Timsen · 27 August 2015, 03:21 AM

Any updates on this "new normal" that the RSC told that one guy previously in this thread?

If its true that this is the "new normal", why do Rolex even bother to keep installing the same mag crystal (Cyclops) on all the new watches if its not going to do anything??? That just makes no sense at all...

Danex · 27 August 2015, 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timsen

Any updates on this "new normal" that the RSC told that one guy previously in this thread?

If its true that this is the "new normal", why do Rolex even bother to keep installing the same mag crystal (Cyclops) on all the new watches if its not going to do anything??? That just makes no sense at all...

My AD filtered his entire stock of poor cyclops and sent them all back to Rolex to be reworked.
Based on that fact, I would say it is not the new normal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk while driving down the interstate at 75 mph

Timsen · 27 August 2015, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danex

My AD filtered his entire stock of poor cyclops and sent them all back to Rolex to be reworked.
Based on that fact, I would say it is not the new normal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk while driving down the interstate at 75 mph

Okay good to know, thanks

tucsonrick · 30 April 2015, 05:16 AM

If that is the new normal, then take the cyclops off the crystal because it serves no function.

Tseg · 30 April 2015, 06:16 AM

Wow... and I thought mine was small....

I think conventional wisdom is that there is either a big or small mag, but I think there is a whole range in between.

JRT · 30 April 2015, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tseg

Wow... and I thought mine was small....

I think conventional wisdom is that there is either a big or small mag, but I think there is a whole range in between.

There is quick estimate the magnification power for BLNR. You just compare the width of your date aperture (white portion) with the bezel number "6". If the width is around the same, it can be accepted as a "normal" or middle size; If it is larger, then you get a "large" magnification. But yours is smaller obviously from the picture. This is just my observation and there is no hard evidence. Please ignore it if you disagree.

viper9669 · 30 April 2015, 11:17 AM

This 'low mag' issue from Rolex is making me think why they even bother installing a cyclops if its going to look like that.

7 February 2015, 02:44 PM	#5
Rags 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Chuck Location: SW Florida Watch: 16233,16610,214270 Posts: 11,196	This should be a major recall. Many of these watches don't look like they have a 2.5x magnification. __________________ 16233 Y Serial Datejust 16610 Z Serial Submariner 214270 Explorer *114300 Oyster Perpetual* *76200 Tudor Date+Day*

7 February 2015, 02:51 PM	#6
viper9669 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Real Name: Patrick Location: SIN Watch: Rolex Posts: 5,066	Cyclops mag looks low on my new rolex explorer 216570 Do get it fixed at RSC, the magnification is not up to factory standards.

8 February 2015, 03:40 AM	#7
Mystro 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: The Mystro ;) Location: Central Pa. Posts: 15,513	Just keep in mind to test the accuracy/regulation of any new watch. I know the lack of quality control cosmetic issue has been running rampant lately with Rolex but make sure any new watch you get is keeping good time. __________________

9 February 2015, 08:10 AM	#15
Eric Chan "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Eric Chan Location: Vancouver, BC CAN Watch: Day-Date 118238 Posts: 8,798	Was at an AD last week and they had two 116713's with the same cyclops issue. Let's hope future Rolex watches will not have this issue. __________________ Official Member: 'Perpetual 30' Vegas International GTG 2016

7 February 2015, 02:31 PM	#2
Chute "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Real Name: Chris Location: Austin Watch: 6 digit Rolex+APRO Posts: 1,561	Who knows, maybe the poor magnifier watches will be collectors items someday

8 February 2015, 05:11 AM	#9
Exhausted "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toronto Posts: 189	Just an update. All the staff at my AD were blown away. Offered me an exchange or to replace date wheel...no hassles at all.

8 February 2015, 08:20 AM	#13
wolffram "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Real Name: Tony Location: Melbourne, Aus Watch: 114060 Posts: 289	Went to 2 ADs here in Melbourne yesterday looking for a Polar to buy. Both had one in stock. One was perfect, the other sat there proudly displaying it's low mag cyclops. Couldn't point this out to the dealer though - they wouldn't even take it out of the case for me to look at it FIrst AD I've been to that really looked down their nose at me Oh well, the jokes on them as they had the dud Polar

30 April 2015, 04:23 AM	#16
qyk1010101 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: - Posts: 37	My RSC said that they have gotten confirmation from Geneva that this is the new normal. Even took out a few new subs to prove to me (indeed all of them had the same low mag). I suspect that models that are harder to move like the 116613 might still have large mag vs the newer SS subs.

27 August 2015, 03:21 AM	#24
Timsen "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Los Angeles, Ca Posts: 25	Any updates on this "new normal" that the RSC told that one guy previously in this thread? If its true that this is the "new normal", why do Rolex even bother to keep installing the same mag crystal (Cyclops) on all the new watches if its not going to do anything??? That just makes no sense at all...

30 April 2015, 05:16 AM	#27
tucsonrick "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Arizona Posts: 106	If that is the new normal, then take the cyclops off the crystal because it serves no function.

30 April 2015, 06:16 AM	#28
Tseg "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Real Name: Tom Location: World Traveler Watch: GMT Master II BLNR Posts: 1,583	Wow... and I thought mine was small.... I think conventional wisdom is that there is either a big or small mag, but I think there is a whole range in between.

30 April 2015, 11:17 AM	#30
viper9669 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Real Name: Patrick Location: SIN Watch: Rolex Posts: 5,066	This 'low mag' issue from Rolex is making me think why they even bother installing a cyclops if its going to look like that.

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