ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

HorologicalTom · 27 November 2013, 08:55 AM

Hi All - Not been here long, love reading all the threads whilst travelling to work or whenever I have spare time (not as often as I'd like)
Anyway I thought I'd ask the opinion of those who own, admire, dislike, love or loathe it.
I have a 16013 (1980) and its in good shape considering its age. Anyway the acrylic had a few minor scuffs (barely visible) and so I decided to replace it with a sapphire crystal but without the date cyclops which I find annoying as from certain angles you just can't see the damn date.
So here is my Datejust - opinions please. Better with or without (*pictures of both posted)

Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk App

joe100 · 27 November 2013, 09:02 AM

Definitely with!

Jason71 · 27 November 2013, 09:06 AM

I like the idea of not having a cyclops, but I would DEFINITELY go back to an acrylic crystal. There are all kinds of issues with converting a plexi watch to a sapphire.

Tools · 27 November 2013, 09:27 AM

Personal taste about the cyclops.. some like it, some don't, but it is a fact that it is a well known Rolex trait and so most do desire it.

As mentioned, the acrylic crystal and bezel seal to the case as a system. Frequently a sapphire retrofit will compromise it's water resistance..

CrownMe · 27 November 2013, 09:39 AM

with..... IMHO if a watch has a Date feature,it should have a cyclops....unless its a Sea Dweller

HorologicalTom · 27 November 2013, 11:20 AM

Hmmmmm maybe I'll pop an acrylic on it. I don't take it in water so may even go for a crystal as longer lasting and add a bit more weight to the watch.
I'm saving for my submariner which I'll have at Christmas time. :)

Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk App

skprd13 · 27 November 2013, 12:59 PM

Just me but I like the Cyclops!

gregorpal · 27 November 2013, 01:14 PM

cyclops = Rolex, for non cyclops rest of all watches.

bridgs · 27 November 2013, 08:53 PM

Agree that the cyclops is a pain sometimes but the dj just looks better with it.

Vincent65 · 27 November 2013, 08:57 PM

Clops, all the way.

RolexPete · 18 January 2014, 07:24 AM

Cyclops...the older I get the more I appreciate it!

crowncollection · 18 January 2014, 07:54 AM

With a cyclops is better

Hawk99 · 18 January 2014, 08:30 AM

I hated the cyclops on my 1680, so went for a non-cyclops tropic 19. BUT on a Datejust, I kind of feel the cyclops is the proper look.
I know, I am complicated.

redweller · 18 January 2014, 09:11 AM

I'm not really a cyclops fan, I like what you did with it. Most people in the vintage section like to leave a rolex how it came from the factory, but do whatever you like best. Personally I absolutely LOVE seeing vintage subs with a nice curved plexi, no cyclops. Looks great to me.

T. Ferguson · 18 January 2014, 09:23 AM

This comes up a lot in the Sub vs. Date Sub threads. Funny thing is most people who prefer the no-date like the symmetry of the dial without the cyclops, but I find the asymmetry produced by the cyclops to makes the watch more interesting to look at. Maybe I'm just weird like that.

silversurfer96790 · 18 January 2014, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorpal

cyclops = rolex, for non cyclops rest of all watches.

x2

FTX I · 18 January 2014, 11:49 AM

I like the cyclops.

RolexPete · 18 January 2014, 11:03 PM

Also, I think a watch from Rolex needs to stay the way Rolex designed it. It is your watch, and you should do what you want but if you ever flip it you should bring it back to stock.

27 November 2013, 08:55 AM	#1
HorologicalTom "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 7	With or Without Date Cyclops? Hi All - Not been here long, love reading all the threads whilst travelling to work or whenever I have spare time (not as often as I'd like) Anyway I thought I'd ask the opinion of those who own, admire, dislike, love or loathe it. I have a 16013 (1980) and its in good shape considering its age. Anyway the acrylic had a few minor scuffs (barely visible) and so I decided to replace it with a sapphire crystal but without the date cyclops which I find annoying as from certain angles you just can't see the damn date. So here is my Datejust - opinions please. Better with or without (*pictures of both posted) Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk App

27 November 2013, 09:02 AM	#2
joe100 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Joe Location: New Mexico Watch: Explorer Posts: 12,840	Definitely with! __________________ It's Espresso, not Expresso. Coffee is not a train in Italy. -TRF Member 6982-

27 November 2013, 09:06 AM	#3
Jason71 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Jason Location: USA Watch: Rolex/Tudor Divers Posts: 7,973	I like the idea of not having a cyclops, but I would DEFINITELY go back to an acrylic crystal. There are all kinds of issues with converting a plexi watch to a sapphire. __________________ Best Regards, Jason Just Say "NO" to Polishing Card-Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch Curmudgeons LIfe is too short to wear inexpensive watches PLEXI IS SEXY

27 November 2013, 09:27 AM	#4
Tools TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron Join Date: May 2007 Real Name: Larry Location: Mojave Desert Watch: GMT's Posts: 43,515	Personal taste about the cyclops.. some like it, some don't, but it is a fact that it is a well known Rolex trait and so most do desire it. As mentioned, the acrylic crystal and bezel seal to the case as a system. Frequently a sapphire retrofit will compromise it's water resistance.. __________________ (Chill ... It's just a watch Forum.....) NAWCC Member

18 January 2014, 07:24 AM	#11
RolexPete "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Peter Location: Massachusetts Watch: 214270 Mk2 Posts: 1,963	Cyclops...the older I get the more I appreciate it! __________________ 2016 Explorer 214270 Mk2 - 1996 Submariner 14060* - 1972 Datejust 1601 1972 Oyster Perpetual 1002 - 1978 Oysterquartz 17000 Omega Seamaster 2265.80 - Omega Seamaster 300 166.0324 *RIP PAL 1942-2015

27 November 2013, 09:39 AM	#5
CrownMe "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Real Name: Kevin Location: Maryland Watch: My Open 6 Posts: 3,433	with..... IMHO if a watch has a Date feature,it should have a cyclops....unless its a Sea Dweller

27 November 2013, 11:20 AM	#6
HorologicalTom "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 7	Hmmmmm maybe I'll pop an acrylic on it. I don't take it in water so may even go for a crystal as longer lasting and add a bit more weight to the watch. I'm saving for my submariner which I'll have at Christmas time. :) Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk App

27 November 2013, 12:59 PM	#7
skprd13 "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Real Name: Tom Location: Kauai Watch: 1675-1680-16750 Posts: 3,346	Just me but I like the Cyclops!

27 November 2013, 01:14 PM	#8
gregorpal "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Myplaceintheworld Posts: 360	cyclops = Rolex, for non cyclops rest of all watches.

27 November 2013, 08:53 PM	#9
bridgs "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Real Name: Shane Location: Minnesota Watch: Rolex Submariner Posts: 1,125	Agree that the cyclops is a pain sometimes but the dj just looks better with it.

27 November 2013, 08:57 PM	#10
Vincent65 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Switzerland Posts: 14,298	Clops, all the way.

18 January 2014, 07:54 AM	#12
crowncollection "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: David Location: australia Posts: 20,216	With a cyclops is better __________________ watches many

18 January 2014, 08:30 AM	#13
Hawk99 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: BC Posts: 388	I hated the cyclops on my 1680, so went for a non-cyclops tropic 19. BUT on a Datejust, I kind of feel the cyclops is the proper look. I know, I am complicated.

18 January 2014, 09:11 AM	#14
redweller "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Real Name: Rob Location: San Francisco Watch: Tiffany 1680 Posts: 57	I'm not really a cyclops fan, I like what you did with it. Most people in the vintage section like to leave a rolex how it came from the factory, but do whatever you like best. Personally I absolutely LOVE seeing vintage subs with a nice curved plexi, no cyclops. Looks great to me.

18 January 2014, 09:23 AM	#15
T. Ferguson "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Left Coast Posts: 7,025	This comes up a lot in the Sub vs. Date Sub threads. Funny thing is most people who prefer the no-date like the symmetry of the dial without the cyclops, but I find the asymmetry produced by the cyclops to makes the watch more interesting to look at. Maybe I'm just weird like that. __________________ *Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.*

18 January 2014, 11:49 AM	#17
FTX I "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Real Name: Flavio Location: N/A Posts: 14,654	I like the cyclops.

18 January 2014, 11:03 PM	#18
RolexPete "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Real Name: Peter Location: Massachusetts Watch: 214270 Mk2 Posts: 1,963	Also, I think a watch from Rolex needs to stay the way Rolex designed it. It is your watch, and you should do what you want but if you ever flip it you should bring it back to stock. __________________ 2016 Explorer 214270 Mk2 - 1996 Submariner 14060* - 1972 Datejust 1601 1972 Oyster Perpetual 1002 - 1978 Oysterquartz 17000 Omega Seamaster 2265.80 - Omega Seamaster 300 166.0324 *RIP PAL 1942-2015

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