What do you think would be the next complication?

[Roxas]

It is unexpected to me that Rolex introduces an annual calendar/GMT watch. I don't like the design but it is technically awesome. An instantaneous annual calendar with 72 hours power reserve is quite extraordinary. Also, the ring command bezel is very cool and practical. I think Rolex is the only manufacturer that uses this kind of complication (ring command I mean)?

What do you think (or like) would be the next complication? I think annual calendar with moon phase/chronograph would be very nice. And Day-Date with perpetual calendar/moon phase could be the next flagship model.

[MoBe]

All I ask for is a moonphase,nothing more,I don`t need to be reminded of the day or the month,I`m not that lazy,although a date might be handy.

[floater156]

Originally Posted by MoBe

All I ask for is a moonphase,nothing more,I don`t need to be reminded of the day or the month,I`m not that lazy,although a date might be handy.

What could you possibly need a moonphase for? Track the ocean tide?

[paracord]

Originally Posted by floater156

What could you possibly need a moonphase for? Track the ocean tide?

Because it's cool, quite simply.

For that matter, what do we possibly NEED any $10K+ watch for, really? Just cool to have.

[Tunacan26]

Originally Posted by paracord

Because it's cool, quite simply.

For that matter, what do we possibly NEED any $10K+ watch for, really? Just cool to have.

Agree, totally. One of my fav watches ever was this Seiko I had years ago that had a moonphase on it. Likely cost 300 bucks, but I LOVED it.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by MoBe

All I ask for is a moonphase,nothing more,I don`t need to be reminded of the day or the month,I`m not that lazy,although a date might be handy.

Well the vintage Moonphase was quite a simple movement from ETA Valjoux even the Cal 3155/6 thats in the DD could be adapted to make a simple moonphase.


Well for me you can keep your complications,all I hope Rolex starts to produce some decent looking watches instead of overpriced watches and bling old stuff.In 20- 40 years time again IMHO,three of the rarest Rolex watches will be the Leopard Daytona, YM11 and the Skydweller, rare because simply they did not sell.

[FremStar]

Peter you forgot the TOG! That must mean us TOG owners better hold on to them! That's PN Daytona status there ... On a realistic note, I recall stories of my dad telling me shops couldn't give those PN's away, fast forward today and some of the $300 models now command in excess of $60-$70k USD To answer the OP's question, I will reserve the complications for other brands as long as Rolex keeps producing reliable pieces I am good to go!

[HL65]

Originally Posted by floater156

What could you possibly need a moonphase for? Track the ocean tide?

Really?

[kmleffler]

Originally Posted by Roxas

It is unexpected to me that Rolex introduces an annual calendar/GMT watch. I don't like the design but it is technically awesome. An instantaneous annual calendar with 72 hours power reserve is quite extraordinary. Also, the ring command bezel is very cool and practical. I think Rolex is the only manufacturer that uses this kind of complication (ring command I mean)?

What do you think (or like) would be the next complication? I think annual calendar with moon phase/chronograph would be very nice. And Day-Date with perpetual calendar/moon phase could be the next flagship model.

I wonder what happens if the bezel is turned accidentally? I know that I would accidentally turn the bezel on my GMT all the time, but that didn't cause much of problem.

[Polemic]

Just more power reserve.

[snaggle]

Originally Posted by Polemic

Just more power reserve.

I find Rolex's power reserve to be very, very good as is. They last more than 48 hours for me.

[azguy]

I don't think Rolex is going to follow the crowd and make a moonphase watch IMO, I mean how many manufactures make a moonphase, a lot.

[horseco]

Originally Posted by kmleffler

I wonder what happens if the bezel is turned accidentally? I know that I would accidentally turn the bezel on my GMT all the time, but that didn't cause much of problem.

The bezel won't turn unless the crown is unscrewed...

[rad87gn]

I have zero use for a moonphase function. I want a countdown timer and/or alarm function.

[capote]

Forget about complications, all I want is Rolex to focus on the tool aspects of their watches again.

Oh well. That is not going to happen. Lucky for me Rolex has already released more desirable watches to keep me busy until I stop ticking myself.

[Roxas]

Originally Posted by capote

Forget about complications, all I want is Rolex to focus on the tool aspects of their watches again.

I think they already have all the tools: Diving, Deep Diving, GMT, Chronograph. What tool do you want?

[GradyPhilpott]

Whatever it is, no one here has ever thought of it.

That's the direction I see for Rolex.

Old themes, perhaps, but with revolutionary execution.

It will probably arrive five years from now, but sooner would be better.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by capote

Forget about complications, all I want is Rolex to focus on the tool aspects of their watches again.

I'm confused because tool watches have complications.

The GMT, the Explorer II, the Daytona all are complicated watches, besides being tool watches.

I think our definitions are drifting too much.

Every Rolex sold has complications.

[horseco]

Originally Posted by capote

Forget about complications, all I want is Rolex to focus on the tool aspects of their watches again.

I think a brand can satisfy different ends of a market, Chevy sells trucks as well as a 200mph Corvette & almost everything in between... I don't see why Rolex can't do the same...

[Rani Drama]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Whatever it is, no one here has ever thought of it.

That's the direction I see for Rolex.

Old themes, perhaps, but with revolutionary execution.

It will probably arrive five years from now, but sooner would be better.

I totally agree. The sky dweller took some complications and executed it in a fashion unthought of by anyone else. The yacht master II has a complication that although to me pointless was something totally different from anything else out there.

I think it's simple functions with elaborate execution.

[Polemic]

Originally Posted by snaggle

I find Rolex's power reserve to be very, very good as is. They last more than 48 hours for me.

It's enough for me too, but longer PR is the most appealing complication for me.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Whatever it is, no one here has ever thought of it.

That's the direction I see for Rolex.

Old themes, perhaps, but with revolutionary execution.

It will probably arrive five years from now, but sooner would be better.

That does seem to be the way they have chosen to go.

[subkrawler]

I said it in another thread, but I'd like to see a diving specific complication, in something like a Submariner II. It couldn't be "Ring Command" because you need the functionality, and classic utility of a unidirectional bezel, but a decompression timer could be based on the 4160 movement used in the YM II. Instead of count down, it could be time elapsed, jump minute, and stretched out to 30 minutes instead of the YM II's 10 minutes. Make the decompression timing aspect "flyback" so it's one touch reset to zero, and you'd have an incredibly useful diving timer.

[capote]

Originally Posted by Roxas

I think they already have all the tools: Diving, Deep Diving, GMT, Chronograph. What tool do you want?

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I'm confused because tool watches have complications.

The GMT, the Explorer II, the Daytona all are complicated watches, besides being tool watches.

I think our definitions are drifting too much.

Every Rolex sold has complications.

Yes obviously every Rolex has a complication. I'm sorry if my ramblings are in-coherant. What I meant was that I think Rolex is too careless with their amazing heritage. For example, the SD was a tool watch, used for a specific purpose. What is the purpose of the DSSD? That is novelty watch, they proved in the 60's already that they could create a watch and put on the bottom of the ocean. As a technical achievement, fine. For bragging rights, fine. They won. But the introduction of the DSSD doesn't make sense, since nobody can dive that deep and re-surface alive. Granted, I'm sure most divers are not depending on any mechanical watches in this day and age. Neither are any astronauts. But the difference here - and this is very subjective on my part - is that they have ruined the design that made their watches iconic. You can still buy a Speedmaster that looks very much like the famous moon watch.

Now a completely useless complication would be a moon phase. Unless your target is were-wolves. Moon phases - like a calendars - are to showcase a company's ability to create great movements. I'm not saying I don't like it generally, all I'm saying is that I have set too high a standard for Rolex I guess. I am fascinated with their history and achievements and that is a thing that sets them apart from most other companys, including the big three.

Now take a look at the Sky-Dweller. Where does that belong? Is it a sport watch? Surely not by the look of it. Is it a dress watch? I guess so. The calendar aspect of it might be very technical advanced, but the execution of the dial is too crude for a dress watch. Would the target group for that watch chose a calendar like that - that at least on the surface - looks primitive when they have the option of getting a Patek for instance? And then put a GMT in the middle like that - mixing roman and arabic numerals.

All I'm saying is that I would like Rolex to upgrade their catalogue in a tasteful fashion, which they clearly don't. This is just one man's opinion. Take it or leave it.

Btw, the lastest useful "bureaucrate tool" complication I've seen that I personally would have any use for is a GO that displays the current week of the year. End of rant.

[LightOnAHill]

Originally Posted by horseco

The bezel won't turn unless the crown is unscrewed...

Sweet! thanks for telling me that, love this forum!

[Boothroyd]

A countdown function to next incremental US price increase...could borrow from the Yachtmaster 44mm.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by capote

Yes obviously every Rolex has a complication. I'm sorry if my ramblings are in-coherant. What I meant was that I think Rolex is too careless with their amazing heritage. For example, the SD was a tool watch, used for a specific purpose. What is the purpose of the DSSD? That is novelty watch, they proved in the 60's already that they could create a watch and put on the bottom of the ocean. As a technical achievement, fine. For bragging rights, fine. They won. But the introduction of the DSSD doesn't make sense, since nobody can dive that deep and re-surface alive. Granted, I'm sure most divers are not depending on any mechanical watches in this day and age. Neither are any astronauts. But the difference here - and this is very subjective on my part - is that they have ruined the design that made their watches iconic. You can still buy a Speedmaster that looks very much like the famous moon watch.

Now a completely useless complication would be a moon phase. Unless your target is were-wolves. Moon phases - like a calendars - are to showcase a company's ability to create great movements. I'm not saying I don't like it generally, all I'm saying is that I have set too high a standard for Rolex I guess. I am fascinated with their history and achievements and that is a thing that sets them apart from most other companys, including the big three.

Now take a look at the Sky-Dweller. Where does that belong? Is it a sport watch? Surely not by the look of it. Is it a dress watch? I guess so. The calendar aspect of it might be very technical advanced, but the execution of the dial is too crude for a dress watch. Would the target group for that watch chose a calendar like that - that at least on the surface - looks primitive when they have the option of getting a Patek for instance? And then put a GMT in the middle like that - mixing roman and arabic numerals.

All I'm saying is that I would like Rolex to upgrade their catalogue in a tasteful fashion, which they clearly don't. This is just one man's opinion. Take it or leave it.

Btw, the lastest useful "bureaucrate tool" complication I've seen that I personally would have any use for is a GO that displays the current week of the year. End of rant.

Thanks for the clarification.

The Sky-Dweller is simply not a watch for most of us. Given its price and complication, it is a watch for jetsetters and mulitinational corporate executives.

It's the watch for those who have reached the heights of the business, political and social ladders.

Go back and look at those ads from the 50s and 60s for the Day-Date indicating that the DD was a watch for world leaders.

And whom did they give their watches to as gifts? Churchill and Eisenhower are two examples.

It's just as well that so many people scoff at the SKD, because in they are so far from the target demographic, they might as well be living on Mars.

That includes me, too, in spades.

[nim]

tourbillon

[Lanfor]

Originally Posted by Polemic

It's enough for me too, but longer PR is the most appealing complication for me.

I beleive the sky-dweller has a 72 hour power reserve, due to the rotor being mounted on ball bearings Hopefully they will make this standard on all their watches if they make 9000 series their new main movements

[NutNut]

I would love to see a Rolex with a power reserve indicator on the dial.