ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Clutch Cargo · 9 March 2013, 05:47 AM

Just curious how others feel. If Rolex offered the cyclops as an option on their watches, would you op to own your watch without it?

Also, would an AD replace a cyclops sapphire crystal with a non cyclops sapphire crystal? Would Rolex consider it an unauthorized modification, thus voiding the warranty and refuse to service the watch in the future?

If I were offered the cyclops as an option, I would not have it on any of my watches. I have a Sub no date and a Daytona, both of which do not have a date function and of course no cyclops. I much prefer the look and feel of their crystals over my cyclops-ed models.

I have an Omega Seamaster and have no trouble reading the date without a cyclops. It seems to me that Rolex could just use a larger or bolder font and eliminate the cyclops. At this point, it's probably looked upon as traditional, and something that makes a Rolex a Rolex.

Sorry if this an old topic, I searched but could not find this exact question asked.

cop414 · 9 March 2013, 05:52 AM

Hmmm very interesting.
Answer to question one, I would opt to not have it.
Answer to question two is no, I don't think that an AD would replace the crystal with one that was not the same as the original. An indie eys, an AD no.
It sure would be nice to have that option though.

Monobrow · 9 March 2013, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clutch Cargo

Just curious how others feel. If Rolex offered the cyclops as an option on their watches, would you op to own your watch without it?

Also, would an AD replace a cyclops sapphire crystal with a non cyclops sapphire crystal? Would Rolex consider it an unauthorized modification, thus voiding the warranty and refuse to service the watch in the future?

If I were offered the cyclops as an option, I would not have it on any of my watches. I have a Sub no date and a Daytona, both of which do not have a date function and of course no cyclops. I much prefer the look and feel of their crystals over my cyclops-ed models.

I have an Omega Seamaster and have no trouble reading the date without a cyclops. It seems to me that Rolex could just use a larger or bolder font and eliminate the cyclops. At this point, it's probably looked upon as traditional, and something that makes a Rolex a Rolex.

Sorry if this an old topic, I searched but could not find this exact question asked.

cyclops is iconic for me, all part of the experience and what makes it special. if i could marry my sub i would.

jwill051 · 9 March 2013, 05:52 AM

Yes to the cyclops

beshannon · 9 March 2013, 05:54 AM

The cyclops is the only thing keeping me from buying a GMT or an Explorer

james1787 · 9 March 2013, 05:55 AM

Yup, it's part of what makes a Rolex a Rolex. Whenever I get a second Rolex it definitely will have the cyclops.

jdm124 · 9 March 2013, 05:58 AM

The cyclops is a traditional part and this, I think, is a part of the reason we have a Rolex on the wrist. Nearly all of watches out there which will do everything a Rolex will at a far loser cost but they are not Rolex.

biscotti · 9 March 2013, 06:00 AM

Cyclops is the best, this is what makes Rolex unique.

Fxmcc · 9 March 2013, 06:03 AM

Yes to cyclops!

Explorer 2011 · 9 March 2013, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by james1787

Yup, it's part of what makes a Rolex a Rolex. Whenever I get a second Rolex it definitely will have the cyclops.

Yes to this, I love the cyclops and will hopefully have one in next few years!

George Ab · 9 March 2013, 06:08 AM

I started out a Seadweller guy due to the clean look. Over the years I have embraced the cyclops. I do like the function.

htownrolex · 9 March 2013, 06:09 AM

Yes to cyclops. It's classic in my mind

Kingair · 9 March 2013, 06:09 AM

Yes yes yes !

HAGWe

esm · 9 March 2013, 06:12 AM

Yes.

Cyclops = Rolex

MaxCargo · 9 March 2013, 06:13 AM

nope.

superdog · 9 March 2013, 06:15 AM

a year ago, no.

today, i love the cyclops. would not have it without.

Chris B · 9 March 2013, 06:16 AM

I need the cyclops

PS

I understand some watches have the magnification recessed into the crystal
so the surface remains flush, ..... would love to see a pic

Rickn · 9 March 2013, 06:17 AM

I'd say no to the cyclops. Not a fan at all.

swils8610 · 9 March 2013, 06:18 AM

Yes to the cyclops. It's iconic Rolex.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lagunatic · 9 March 2013, 06:21 AM

I would opt to not have it

Bangel · 9 March 2013, 06:22 AM

It's a very good question: The hypothetical optional cyclops.

I can completely relate to your situation. For me, the cyclops was an an acquired taste.

I never used to like them. It made me seriously consider getting a submariner without a date even though having a date function was an "essential" criterion for me. I ended up buying the sub date "despite" the cyclops.

Now I'm used to it and quite like it.

So back in the time before I bought my sub, I probably would have chosen one without the hypothetical optional cyclops. Fast forward to the present and I would probably choose one with.

Also, I highly doubt Rolex would sanction a swap of a crystal with cyclops to one without. I believe they would insist on returning it to its original form if they got their hands on it.

Rich2putt · 9 March 2013, 06:28 AM

Definite YES!!!

1911 · 9 March 2013, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bangel

It's a very good question: The hypothetical optional cyclops.

I can completely relate to your situation. For me, the cyclops was an an acquired taste.

I never used to like them. It made me seriously consider getting a submariner without a date even though having a date function was an "essential" criterion for me. I ended up buying the sub date "despite" the cyclops.

I agree, and do wonder if it less fashionable now.

mjclark32 · 9 March 2013, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superdog

a year ago, no.

today, i love the cyclops. would not have it without.

Same, although I still could live without, but I like it.

jlc123 · 9 March 2013, 06:42 AM

I would go no date regardless.

Armyguy03 · 9 March 2013, 06:51 AM

Yes, I'm 20/20 and it just looks so darn cute as a button.

Rolex Richie · 9 March 2013, 07:05 AM

I would go NO CYCLOPS. I like the smooth face and the Cyclops is a real give-away sign of the watch when you are in public.

MrLee · 9 March 2013, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by james1787

Yup, it's part of what makes a Rolex a Rolex. Whenever I get a second Rolex it definitely will have the cyclops.

This

Dan Pierce · 9 March 2013, 07:08 AM

Yes, and even when it's not.
dP

kilyung · 9 March 2013, 07:11 AM

I need it to read the date with my blind eyes.

9 March 2013, 05:47 AM	#1
Clutch Cargo "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Real Name: Lynn Location: Dallas, Texas Posts: 452	If The Cyclops Was Optional, Would You Have It? Just curious how others feel. If Rolex offered the cyclops as an option on their watches, would you op to own your watch without it? Also, would an AD replace a cyclops sapphire crystal with a non cyclops sapphire crystal? Would Rolex consider it an unauthorized modification, thus voiding the warranty and refuse to service the watch in the future? If I were offered the cyclops as an option, I would not have it on any of my watches. I have a Sub no date and a Daytona, both of which do not have a date function and of course no cyclops. I much prefer the look and feel of their crystals over my cyclops-ed models. I have an Omega Seamaster and have no trouble reading the date without a cyclops. It seems to me that Rolex could just use a larger or bolder font and eliminate the cyclops. At this point, it's probably looked upon as traditional, and something that makes a Rolex a Rolex. Sorry if this an old topic, I searched but could not find this exact question asked.

9 March 2013, 05:52 AM	#2
cop414 TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: Apr 2012 Real Name: Tim Location: Pennsylvania Watch: 14060M Posts: 72,234	Hmmm very interesting. Answer to question one, I would opt to not have it. Answer to question two is no, I don't think that an AD would replace the crystal with one that was not the same as the original. An indie eys, an AD no. It sure would be nice to have that option though. __________________ Rolex Submariner 14060M Omega Seamaster 2254.50 DOXA Professional 1200T Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons TRF's "After Dark" Bar & NightClub Patron P Club Member #17 2 FA ENABLED

9 March 2013, 05:54 AM	#5
beshannon "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Brian Location: Northern Virginia Watch: One of Not Many Posts: 17,892	The cyclops is the only thing keeping me from buying a GMT or an Explorer __________________ IWC Portugieser 7 Day, Omega Seamaster SMP300m, Vacheron Constantin Traditionnelle Complete Calendar, Glashutte PanoInverse, Glashutte SeaQ Panorama Date, Omega Aqua Terra 150, Omega CK 859, Omega Speedmaster 3861 Moonwatch, Breitling Superocean Steelfish, JLC Atmos Transparent Clock

9 March 2013, 06:08 AM	#11
George Ab "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Real Name: George Location: Seattle Watch: One of Them Posts: 6,924	I started out a Seadweller guy due to the clean look. Over the years I have embraced the cyclops. I do like the function. __________________

9 March 2013, 06:13 AM	#15
MaxCargo "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: EU Watch: DSSD Posts: 537	no nope. __________________ Life is a sexually transmitted disease and the mortality rate is one hundred percent" You just have to trust your own madness,sanity is only a cosy lie. DSSD, Tudor Pelagos. SDc 4000

9 March 2013, 05:52 AM	#4
jwill051 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: Jim Location: Maine & Florida Watch: 16710,116619 Posts: 540	Yes to the cyclops

9 March 2013, 05:55 AM	#6
james1787 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Real Name: James Location: New Providence,NJ Watch: Submariner 14060 Posts: 2,371	Yup, it's part of what makes a Rolex a Rolex. Whenever I get a second Rolex it definitely will have the cyclops.

9 March 2013, 05:58 AM	#7
jdm124 Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: USA Posts: 80	The cyclops is a traditional part and this, I think, is a part of the reason we have a Rolex on the wrist. Nearly all of watches out there which will do everything a Rolex will at a far loser cost but they are not Rolex.

9 March 2013, 06:00 AM	#8
biscotti "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Canada Watch: Smurf Posts: 363	Cyclops is the best, this is what makes Rolex unique.

9 March 2013, 06:03 AM	#9
Fxmcc "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Sussex Posts: 14	Yes to cyclops!

9 March 2013, 06:09 AM	#12
htownrolex "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Houston, tx Posts: 8	Yes to cyclops. It's classic in my mind

9 March 2013, 06:09 AM	#13
Kingair "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: USA Watch: Not enough ;-) Posts: 21,232	Yes yes yes ! HAGWe

9 March 2013, 06:12 AM	#14
esm "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: Eric Location: Location,Location Watch: this, bro... Posts: 15,340	Yes. Cyclops = Rolex

9 March 2013, 06:15 AM	#16
superdog 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Real Name: Seth Location: nj Watch: Omega Posts: 24,834	a year ago, no. today, i love the cyclops. would not have it without. __________________ If happiness is a state of mind, why look anywhere else for it? IG: gsmotorclub IG: thesawcollection (Both mostly just car stuff)

9 March 2013, 06:16 AM	#17
Chris B "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Peterborough Posts: 9,631	I need the cyclops PS I understand some watches have the magnification recessed into the crystal so the surface remains flush, ..... would love to see a pic

9 March 2013, 06:17 AM	#18
Rickn "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Pittsburgh Watch: Green Sub Posts: 604	I'd say no to the cyclops. Not a fan at all.

9 March 2013, 06:18 AM	#19
swils8610 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Real Name: shannon Location: usa Posts: 9,210	Yes to the cyclops. It's iconic Rolex. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

9 March 2013, 06:21 AM	#20
Lagunatic Banned Join Date: Apr 2010 Real Name: Ron Location: Laguna Niguel, Ca Watch: Rolex 116613LN Posts: 1,724	I would opt to not have it

9 March 2013, 06:22 AM	#21
Bangel "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Australia Watch: 116610LN Posts: 15,802	It's a very good question: The hypothetical optional cyclops. I can completely relate to your situation. For me, the cyclops was an an acquired taste. I never used to like them. It made me seriously consider getting a submariner without a date even though having a date function was an "essential" criterion for me. I ended up buying the sub date "despite" the cyclops. Now I'm used to it and quite like it. So back in the time before I bought my sub, I probably would have chosen one without the hypothetical optional cyclops. Fast forward to the present and I would probably choose one with. Also, I highly doubt Rolex would sanction a swap of a crystal with cyclops to one without. I believe they would insist on returning it to its original form if they got their hands on it.

9 March 2013, 06:28 AM	#22
Rich2putt "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Rich Location: MA Watch: TOG, Exp ll white Posts: 549	Definite YES!!! __________________ The late, great Jackie Gleason once said, "the greatest waste of money is not spending it".

9 March 2013, 06:42 AM	#25
jlc123 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: United States Watch: Overseas Posts: 992	I would go no date regardless.

9 March 2013, 06:51 AM	#26
Armyguy03 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: DM[V] Watch: 16710 \| 16600 Posts: 3,546	Yes, I'm 20/20 and it just looks so darn cute as a button. __________________ Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons

9 March 2013, 07:05 AM	#27
Rolex Richie "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Leeds Watch: Sub 116613LB Posts: 187	I would go NO CYCLOPS. I like the smooth face and the Cyclops is a real give-away sign of the watch when you are in public.

9 March 2013, 07:08 AM	#29
Dan Pierce 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Real Name: D'OH! Location: Kentucky Watch: Rolex-1 Tudor-3 Posts: 36,215	Yes, and even when it's not. dP __________________ TRF Member# 1668 Bass Player in TRF "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Band Commander-in-Chief of The Nylon Nation The Crown & Shield Club Honorary Member of P-Club

9 March 2013, 07:11 AM	#30
kilyung 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Cave Watch: Sundial Posts: 33,940	I need it to read the date with my blind eyes.

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