Drilled lugs vs new non drilled

[safetypro79]

Was curious about what longtime Rolex owners think of the drilled lugs vs newer non drilled. Facilitating changing bracelet or straps are as plus with drilled lugs


but with the newer design I have been told Rolex is now using a thinner stronger springbat of course with flanged springhbars.

[WAK4]

My preference is lug holes - I think strap changes are easier with them.

Though if you have the proper spring bar tool, the non drilled are not too bad. One I use looks like a wide-legged set of tweezers.

[Chadridv]

For me it's pretty simple. 5 digit reference - lug holes. 6 digit - no lug holes.

To me the newer watches are perfect as is and holes would ruin the aesthetic. given the choice in the older watches I like the lug holes and don't find them disruptive to the design.

[safetypro79]

Thanks so much.

John

[Base-Z]

The new models with thicker lugs, look better without the holes.
The older and vintage pieces to me look kinda cool with the lug holes,
and it takes me back to different time and attitudes, as can be seen by
the advice at the bottom of the card that came with my Sub back in 1968.

[subtona]

Lugholes simplify strap changes and do lot require a special and pain in the butt tool.

The Tudor Pelagos comes new with both a bracelet and a strap, it is a great idea and great watch but without lugholes (combined with the super tight tolerances of new technology) it is an unnecessary pain in the butt to swap out straps.

Finally as I understand it, I am very happy to hear Tudor has recently reintroduced lugholes to their new black bay.

[landroverking]

I'm all for lug holes.

[drifter01]

I love lug holes. Won't own a Rolex without them. In fact, almost all of my watches have lug holes, Rolex or not.

[sensui]

I think lugholes make things easy changing straps....but if you have the proper bergeon tools it's not rocket science either to work with a springbar.....I prefer the cleaner look without the holes to be honest.

[Rags]

I prefer no lug holes, I know the lug holes make changing the bracelet easier but I like the smooth clean look.

[dkpw]

It's really a hypothetical question, barring cleaning, as why would you wear a Sub or indeed any other Rolex on anything other than the bracelet it came with? ;)

[Cabaiguan]

I like lug holes and appreciate manufacturers such as Seiko for keeping them alive.

[Porter]

I like both! Depending on the model or brand I prefer with or without!

[bdex75]

Originally Posted by dkpw

It's really a hypothetical question, barring cleaning, as why would you wear a Sub or indeed any other Rolex on anything other than the bracelet it came with? ;)

Variety is the spice of life my friend.

I generally do not take the bracelets off of my Tudor/Rolex watches as I do not have the proper tool to make the changes easy. I just have bought other watches to swap straps on to keep it fresh.

I like lug holes.

I wonder why a watch like the bronze BB was the one they chose to put lug holes on as it will most likely never be on a bracelet. And even the leather strap is an easy change with a strap tool. No need for lug holes. But I still like it and will still buy one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subtona]

Originally Posted by dkpw

It's really a hypothetical question, barring cleaning, as why would you wear a Sub or indeed any other Rolex on anything other than the bracelet it came with? ;)

I would agree the bracelet is far superior to all other choices ...

but as said above variety is the spice of life...

For example, with lug holes I can swap it out in a minute without a special tool and perfect eyesight for rubber, leather or a NATO...

any of these options work for me when I'm traveling as they draw much less attention from would be thieves than the highly recognizable oyster bracelet


FYI the oyster bracelet was reported in an article on Rolex theft to be a significant tell tale sign of an authentic Rolex from a distance.