why the cyclops?

[Rollieboo23]

Y’all tripping the cyclops is everything.......I love the cyclops and I’m a millennial

[Geckobros]

As I have aged I appreciate being able to see the date without issue.

[KonradvonMarburg]

I love the cyclops. I think it's sexy!

[Cambo]

I'm definitely a cyclops fan.

[KonradvonMarburg]

Originally Posted by Cambo

I'm definitely a cyclops fan.

Me too. Now when I see a watch with a date complication that doesn't have a magnifier like the cyclops I'm like ewwww. LOL.

Just me though. Love u all!!

[Spartan1]

Because its a Rolex!

[DoctorsOrders]

I love the look of a cyclops on the watch, it's part of what makes a Rolex a Rolex! Plus its so useful lol

[Stan Cooper]

I like it; it's much more practical than wearing bifocals or cheaters to see the date at a quick glance (I'm 78).

[abozz]

Wait to have 50+ years old and you will understand.

[JohnGingerwood]

It serves no purpose anymore. It is just a signature trademark of Rolex. Similar to the HE valve on SMP.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by JohnGingerwood

It serves no purpose anymore.

Simply not true.

[saxo3]

like or don't like -> suum cuique

[173rdabn]

I'm quite fond of the magnifier the cyclops uses.

[CyclePath1]

The cyclops is so unique to Rolex though but I do prefer the No Date Sub over the Date Sub.

[Aterth]

I actually don't mind seeing the cyclops at all.

[boogiebot]

I think the cyclops is part of what makes Rolex, Rolex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dtwer]

I, too, won't want a Rolex without the cyclops; it just looks incomplete without it.

[springbar]

Originally Posted by Fred48

So, I'm asking, why not get rid of the cyclops and just make the date BIGGER!

The date is already as big as it can be with a single date wheel.

Originally Posted by Fred48

Seems to work pretty well for A Lange & Sohn!

Going bigger requires multiple wheels, with the attendant complexity and bulk.

Rolex was putting cyclopses on comparatively thin and rugged Datejusts in the 1950s.

[Fred48]

Originally Posted by springbar

The date is already as big as it can be with a single date wheel.


Going bigger requires multiple wheels, with the attendant complexity and bulk.

Rolex was putting cyclopses on comparatively thin and rugged Datejusts in the 1950s.

good answer

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by samson66

Agree completely. I love the dial on the DSSD but the inset date window on that watch and on the SD4K drive me nuts! Clearly the position was designed to accommodate a cyclops lens. The fact that Rolex didn't design a calendar wheel with the date in the correct position on the far right of the dial just shows laziness or cost cutting on their part. They simply did not want to spend the money to design a different movement for those watches.

Originally Posted by springbar

The date is already as big as it can be with a single date wheel.


Going bigger requires multiple wheels, with the attendant complexity and bulk.

Rolex was putting cyclopses on comparatively thin and rugged Datejusts in the 1950s.

Economically, made sense just to use the 3135 movement Rolex already had, and the same dial, and put that all in a case that can withstand the pressure down at 12,800 ft. The DSSD would be expected to sell at far fewer numbers than the Sub and all the Datejusts that use the 3135, so a new movement would not likely be cost-effective.

I think if Rolex wanted to, they could have reduced the space between the calendar wheel and the edge of the 3135, like on this movement. Even just a small increase in radius would have allowed a larger circumference and hence more space for larger numbers.

[eonflux]

Originally Posted by abozz

Wait to have 50+ years old and you will understand.

Originally Posted by RolexSimon

Love the James Cameron - perfect date!!

Originally Posted by Fred48

I'm not a fan of watches with a date complication, as it usually spoils the symmetry of the dial. However, I can understand the need and desire of many for a date.
But, in my opinion, the Rolex cyclops is ugly, especially on a dressier watch like a datejust.
So, I'm asking, why not get rid of the cyclops and just make the date BIGGER!
Seems to work pretty well for A Lange & Sohn!

Comments appreciated.

As I age, I like the functionality of the cyclops, but it's such a crude solution.
Agree it would be better to make the date larger.
Could enlarge the date wheel, which would allow larger numbers, and move the date window closer to the edge.

Yeah, the cyclops work on my Sub and GMT, but I don't like having them on the crystals.

I actually hate the small and poorly positioned date window on my DSSD.
It's obviously not the right implementation for that watch.
The 3135 calendar wheel and date window position is designed for a cyclops. Rolex should have made a movement specific for the DSSD dial and lack of cyclops.

For a magnifier, much prefer the AP solution on my Diver.
This also allows for a wider date viewing angle than the cyclops affords.

[Fred48]

Originally Posted by eonflux

As I age, I like the functionality of the cyclops, but it's such a crude solution.
Agree it would be better to make the date larger.
Could enlarge the date wheel, which would allow larger numbers, and move the date window closer to the edge.

Yeah, the cyclops work on my Sub and GMT, but I don't like having them on the crystals.

I actually hate the small and poorly positioned date window on my DSSD.
It's obviously not the right implementation for that watch.
The 3135 calendar wheel and date window position is designed for a cyclops. Rolex should have made a movement specific for the DSSD dial and lack of cyclops.

For a magnifier, much prefer the AP solution on my Diver.
This also allows for a wider date viewing angle than the cyclops affords.

another good answer!

[samson66]

Originally Posted by eonflux

As I age, I like the functionality of the cyclops, but it's such a crude solution.
Agree it would be better to make the date larger.
Could enlarge the date wheel, which would allow larger numbers, and move the date window closer to the edge.

Yeah, the cyclops work on my Sub and GMT, but I don't like having them on the crystals.

I actually hate the small and poorly positioned date window on my DSSD.
It's obviously not the right implementation for that watch.
The 3135 calendar wheel and date window position is designed for a cyclops. Rolex should have made a movement specific for the DSSD dial and lack of cyclops.

Agree completely. I love the dial on the DSSD but the inset date window on that watch and on the SD4K drive me nuts! Clearly the position was designed to accommodate a cyclops lens. The fact that Rolex didn't design a calendar wheel with the date in the correct position on the far right of the dial just shows laziness or cost cutting on their part. They simply did not want to spend the money to design a different movement for those watches.

[slus]

Both of mine from Rolex and Tudor have dates but no Cyclops, and it is not by accident, I am also not a huge fan of it. I can read the dates just fine without it, all it does for me is distract from the dial.

Interestingly I think the Cyclops just screams "Rolex" to the average person. My Sub Date pulled many "is that a Rolex" comments while the much more noticeable (to me) DeepSea attracts very little attention. Not a bad thing, just surprising.

[Heady Topper]

Because good design prioritizes function over beauty.

[Aquaholic_user]

Originally Posted by Heady Topper

Because good design prioritizes function over beauty.

100! Ive been saying function over form for years.

Sent from my balloon knot

[rfiorito]

Though it was several years ago, my AD replaced my sub crystal with a non-cyclops one, so another option to consider. It was also possible to remove the cyclops on the crystal, but now with the UV coatings, its not a viable option for new models.

[blue lion]

I'm an unabashed fan of Rolex. Both of my watches have the cyclops. I can't imagine owning a watch that doesn't display the date.
That said-and I get the part about a date wheel having only so much space-an extra piece of plastic on an expensive watch gives the "cheap" appearance.

[yoniman]

Cyclops designed for a purpose.


It's all about health, happiness & family. The rest are just necessary inconveniences we have to deal with.

[Utomow]

I think it is Rolex iconic