Visit to RSC Kent re Cyclops Magnification

[esdeezy]

My DJII has a weak cyclops too. Maybe ROLEX is switching to weaker magnification?

[Roger1079]

Originally Posted by padi56

So you will stop buying a Rolex because of some perceived minute difference in cyclops magnification. Simple answer buy a SD they don't have a cyclops so there would be one less thing to moan about.And to the origial poster Ruud Van Driver just cannot see the point of creating 3 threads on exactly the same subject.

Padi, you have written some of the best and most informative posts I have ever read here, and I respect your opinion, but this one I have to disagree with you on. This is not a problem with perception as this is no trick of the eye, different camera distance, different height of the crystal, or a bad angle for the photos of the cyclops. This is not an OCD thing with an alignment point that doesn't exist whether it be a crown or bezel. This is a real issue. I have now seen it at 3 AD's in 3 different cities (Ft. Lauderdale, Orlando, and Sarasota) with both GMT's and Subs across all dial colors and all materials. Most are magnified at the 2.5x that has been the standard since 1953, however a couple out of the dozen or so at each store are magnified 1.5x at best.

There is an obvious variance with the crystal or cyclops on these particular watches that is causing the lack of magnification. Rolex advertises 2.5x magnification in their digital and print advertising literature and they talk about it as if it is one of the best and most defining features of models that have them. Although all the pictures have crowns and bezels perfectly aligned in photos, they never define that as a feature in writing. That is my problem. You absolutely cannot look at the two identical 116610LV's in the quote below and tell me the bottom one is magnified 2.5x as advertised where the watch in the top photo is perfect.

I honestly wish a watchmaker with the time and resources would remove the crystals from two examples like the ones in the pictures quoted below. With a set of digital calipers and the crystal out of the watch it would be simple to tell where the issue lies, whether it be the distance between the crystal and dial caused by a slight variance in crystal thickness, a difference in the curvature of the surface of the cyclops, or a combination of both. To the naked eye these differences would be impossible to see aside from the end result which is a lack of proper magnification, but what I described above would leave no doubt as precise measurements taken with precision tools would expose the cause and remove all room for speculation.

Some people may not care about this and I can absolutely respect that, but for me if the watches features are not as advertised in print it is definitely a problem (whether accidental or intentional) that I would not be able to enjoy the watch with, and personal enjoyment is the only purpose of a luxury item for me.

Originally Posted by goatter

Show them this:



vs

[brandrea]

I agree and think that the date magnification should be sold as advertised at 2.5 times

[Old Expat Beast]

This guy just got his fixed by Rolex. https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=386768

[Minimalist]

Here's a comparison I've just made. The one on the left is a picture of one direct from the rolex website and the left one is a picture of one I took.

[shay2nak]

I bought my SubC in 7/2014 and date mag is normal.

[Rogdogg]

I bought mine Nov '14 and the mag. is wrong. The next week in the same store they had a correct one. In January I was in Abu Dhabi airport and the Rolex AD there had one where the mag. was wrong also

[Camel]

[QUOTE=Minimalist;5537609]Here's a comparison I've just made. The one on the left is a picture of one direct from the rolex website and the left one is a picture of one I took.

[/QUOTE

Good comparison - the right watch is definetly not x2.5.

[rmfnla]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

This guy just got his fixed by Rolex. https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=386768

After your experience with your Tudor perhaps you can start a new business replacing these...

[Reu]

[otisc]

Stopped by the AD today to try on a few watches. All the magnification on the Subs and GMTs looked fine. But then they had four very similar Datejust (36mm). Two in white face, two in blue. Three of the magnification looked fine. But one was CLEARLY smaller than the rest. I pointed it out to the person helping me, and they could not believe it. They called someone else over, who was also pretty shocked. When I told them about the forum and some of the other examples, they swore this was the first time they saw it. They then pulled the watch from the counter and promised it was going back to Rolex.

I WISH I could have taken a photo! But after snapped a photo of their outstanding Tudor section, I was asked politely not to snap any photos with my phone. I really should have insisted, but I didn't want to be a jerk. Anyway here is a photo of their Tudor set-up. Really nice!

[rmfnla]

Originally Posted by otisc

Stopped by the AD today to try on a few watches. All the magnification on the Subs and GMTs looked fine. But then they had four very similar Datejust (36mm). Two in white face, two in blue. Three of the magnification looked fine. But one was CLEARLY smaller than the rest. I pointed it out to the person helping me, and they could not believe it. They called someone else over, who was also pretty shocked. When I told them about the forum and some of the other examples, they swore this was the first time they saw it. They then pulled the watch from the counter and promised it was going back to Rolex.

I WISH I could have taken a photo! But after snapped a photo of their outstanding Tudor section, I was asked politely not to snap any photos with my phone. I really should have insisted, but I didn't want to be a jerk. Anyway here is a photo of their Tudor set-up. Really nice!

I can believe they hadn't noticed this before; most watch salespeople are not WISes (?).

Good response, though...

[RHIII]

I bought a new blue dial YM today from my AD - normal date mag. They didn't have any of the lower magnified ones in the case. We looked at everything they had...nor have they seen one. If they do I'm sure I'll hear about it.

[DJExplorer]

Originally Posted by DJExplorer

Does anyone have a spec sheet for the dial and date window cut out sizes?
If we know the date window width then it would be an easy calculation to see if in fact it is the stated 2.5x magnification.
From what is seen in AD's and others SubC & GMTc, if the upper and lower widths of the date window fill out the width of the straight edges of the cyclops, then this appears to be the more recognized 2.5x mag. We will only know for sure if the size of the date window aperture is known.
Here is a GMT today that has noticeable smaller mag in an AD.
Compared to the sub next to it, it's night and day. (Sorry no pic of the ref sub)
The AD was having his rolex guy in this afternoon and was going to ask him about the apparent difference.
I'll call the AD tomorrow and see if anyone will admit or give reason.

I actually called the AD back today and spoke with the sales rep. He pointed out to the Rolex rep that two GMT were totally different magnifications (the smaller mag in the photo above). The rolex guy commended the sales rep for spotting this but did not have an answer for him. He was going to get back to Geneva to enquire, then let the AD know his findings. (Ben Bridge in Austin). This could just be diversion tactics and not sure it will get escalated to Rolex.

[DJExplorer]

Pic of small Magnification.

[RHIII]

I bought my new Stainless YM on Friday from my AD and it's 2.5x mag. We takes for a few mins about this issue and they haven't seen any cases yet...but are on the lookout...

[AS1]

Originally Posted by DJExplorer

Pic of small Magnification.

wow. the issue very noticeable indeed in that picture.

[rouxeny]

I bought my blue YM in 1/14. Compared to my DJ, the mag is noticeably smaller. This has been talked about in a few other threads. I do not think its limited to 2014 watches. Pic attached.

On my DJ, when viewing the watch from a typical position, about 10 inches away, the corners of the date window just about touch the edges of the cyclops. Not the case in the small mag versions.

Not surprising that Rolex fails to acknowledge this. Clearly it's not harming sales and only watch-crazies see it. We are a tiny percentage of the watch buying population. Why fix a problem that doesn't exist?

Maybe if a really good writeup, with examples and a description of possible causes showed up on Hodinkee or ABlogtoWatch......

[Al1969]

Originally Posted by rouxeny

I bought my blue YM in 1/14. Compared to my DJ, the mag is noticeably smaller. This has been talked about in a few other threads. I do not think its limited to 2014 watches. Pic attached.

On my DJ, when viewing the watch from a typical position, about 10 inches away, the corners of the date window just about touch the edges of the cyclops. Not the case in the small mag versions.

Not surprising that Rolex fails to acknowledge this. Clearly it's not harming sales and only watch-crazies see it. We are a tiny percentage of the watch buying population. Why fix a problem that doesn't exist?

Maybe if a really good writeup, with examples and a description of possible causes showed up on Hodinkee or ABlogtoWatch......

As I mentioned before. RSC New York called me back regarding the mag on my BLNR and Explorer II. They told me to bring them to RSC and they'd replace if needed since both watches are under warranty.

[Rameez-Q]

I had a similar problem with my BLNR, the magnification was not just off but was squint!

Was replaced under warranty however I was disappointed at such a fault & to be without my watch for 4+ weeks.

[Watch Professor]

Originally Posted by Sublover2166

There is clearly a magnification issue with some of these Cyclops. Surprised no comment from the powers that be. Looks like 1.5X mag on the bottom. Unacceptable.

Is it the magnification or the date window?

[cht]

Originally Posted by Watch Professor

Is it the magnification or the date window?

it is NOT the date window or date wheel.

[john_nch]

Originally Posted by Watch Professor

Is it the magnification or the date window?

I posted my findings in a previous thread. If one holds them side by side you can clearly see the stronger magnification cyclops has a greater curvature lens. One aspect of this, which has not been discussed is that the lower mag lens having less curvature is not as obtrusive appearing giving a stealthier and less noticeable cyclops from a distance. This also makes the date appear like an hour marker matching the 6&9 o'clock markers approaching the symmetry of a no date sub, just my observations.

[Ruud Van Driver]

[QUOTE=Camel;5537677]

Originally Posted by Minimalist

Here's a comparison I've just made. The one on the left is a picture of one direct from the rolex website and the left one is a picture of one I took.

[/QUOTE

Good comparison - the right watch is definetly not x2.5.

This one looks more like an issue with the font on the date wheel to me.

[otisc]

It's more than the font. Just look at the bottom corners of the date window on the one on the left. The white box extends to or past the bottom corners of the cyclops. Look how much green surrounds the date window at right.

To me this is really crazy. And so widespread with no response from Rolex (except to actually admit error when re-fitting ones that are being turned in to RSC for crystal replacement)... that it really shakes my view of the brand.

The thing about Rolex is that their entire brand and reputation is built on the fact that the way they take their time, Every. Single. Watch. Is. Perfect.

How could something so obvious pass them by?

[Brushpup]

Originally Posted by Al1969

As I mentioned before. RSC New York called me back regarding the mag on my BLNR and Explorer II. They told me to bring them to RSC and they'd replace if needed since both watches are under warranty.

So are you going to do it? If you do, report back please. I don't think we have a report of USA RSC doing a warranty replacement yet.

Originally Posted by otisc

It's more than the font. Just look at the bottom corners of the date window on the one on the left. The white box extends to or past the bottom corners of the cyclops. Look how much green surrounds the date window at right.

To me this is really crazy. And so widespread with no response from Rolex (except to actually admit error when re-fitting ones that are being turned in to RSC for crystal replacement)... that it really shakes my view of the brand.

The thing about Rolex is that their entire brand and reputation is built on the fact that the way they take their time, Every. Single. Watch. Is. Perfect.
How could something so obvious pass them by?

I don't know, but it is strange. Things do happen, and it's interesting there was only one where you were. Makes it seem more an more like a QC issue. Any chance you will go back and be able to find out what happened to the returned model?

[Al1969]

Originally Posted by Brushpup

So are you going to do it? If you do, report back please. I don't think we have a report of USA RSC doing a warranty replacement yet.



I don't know, but it is strange. Things do happen, and it's interesting there was only one where you were. Makes it seem more an more like a QC issue. Any chance you will go back and be able to find out what happened to the returned model?

Yes I dropped off my Explorer II and BLNR at RSC NY. They told me their tech didn't see a problem with the magnification, but they'll have someone else look at them Monday. Shortly after dropping them off, I went to the boutique and identified a Datejust II that also had subpar magnification.

[Brushpup]

Originally Posted by Al1969

Yes I dropped off my Explorer II and BLNR at RSC NY. They told me their tech didn't see a problem with the magnification, but they'll have someone else look at them Monday. Shortly after dropping them off, I went to the boutique and identified a Datejust II that also had subpar magnification.

Great! It will be interesting to see what they say. Did you point out the DJII in the boutique?

[Al1969]

Originally Posted by Brushpup

Great! It will be interesting to see what they say. Did you point out the DJII in the boutique?

I pointed out to the salesman that was wearing one, the magnification issue. He was wearing a DJII with the gray roman dial. I had him show me the exact same watch and there was a discrepancy with the magnification. He did recognize the difference and even had a second salesperson come over and they both agreed the mag was off. I took his business card and told him I'll let him know what the techs are RSC(upstairs) tell me.

[Al1969]

Here are some pictures of the two watches. Perhaps I can get some feedback to make sure it's just not my 'imagination'.