No love for the YM42?

[SamArj]

I purchased a YM42 earlier this year and think it's a lovely watch.
The bezel with a mix of gloss and matt is stunning and the oysterflex bracelet makes it look very 'sporty'. It also wears very comfortably on the wrist.
Yet it doesn't seem to have much of a following.

I'm a newbie to all things horological and so history/heritage is something I'm trying to catch up on. Is the lack of love for this watch because it lacks heritage?

A very close friend (close enough that he doesn't need to spare my feelings lol) said the watch doesn't do much for the money ie it costs £23k but doesn't have a GMT function like a...GMT or deep water credentials like a sub/dssd etc
But he's also not a Rolex fan in general..

Anyway, interested in your thoughts.

Have a good day.

[Master_Grogu]

It's expensive, it looks like a submariner (tonality-wise) and I think many people are biased against OF. Hell, I even had an SA tell me she didn't like OF because we can't tell how it will age in 10 years.

I like it, and I've tried it a few times. It's a good watch, but I feel I'd be perhaps happier with just a Submariner or the RG variant for more pop. I do like the fact the dial is this deep dark, as I am not a fan of matte dials.

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by Master_Grogu

It's expensive, it looks like a submariner (tonality-wise) and I think many people are biased against OF. Hell, I even had an SA tell me she didn't like OF because we can't tell how it will age in 10 years.

I like it, and I've tried it a few times. It's a good watch, but I feel I'd be perhaps happier with just a Submariner or the RG variant for more pop. I do like the fact the dial is this deep dark, as I am not a fan of matte dials.

Interesting, however the OF doesn't seem to put people off the Daytona on OF.

Thanks

[Master_Grogu]

Originally Posted by SamArj

Interesting, however the OF doesn't seem to put people off the Daytona on OF.

Thanks

Daytona is daytona. They could sell it on OysterLon (Rolex branded Nato) at 30k a piece and people would flock.

[TswaneNguni]

I am afraid not much love for the YMIIs .Correct .

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by Master_Grogu

Daytona is daytona. They could sell it on OysterLon (Rolex branded Nato) at 30k a piece and people would flock.

Very true

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by TswaneNguni

I am afraid not much love for the YMIIs .Correct .

YM 42 is a completely different watch to YMII isn't it?

[greggywatchguy]

I think it’s really nice looking, but I think a lot of watches are overlooked because they aren’t what everyone is rabid about at the time.

[Watchsama]

Seems like someone is after some confirmation bias.
If you like the watch, why do you care what other people think...

[Jrsanchez]

Id rather put a rubber strap on a submariner and spend the extra money on another rolex

[samson66]

I like it but lets face it, it's a $30K watch that looks like a hunk of rubber and steel. At that price point there are other more desirable watches IMO.

I would have preferred them to use SS on this one and keep the price down. Using WG doesn't add anything to this particular watch because so little of it is seen.

[mattidk]

the YM42 in WG/Oysterflex is amazing

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by Watchsama

Seems like someone is after some confirmation bias.
If you like the watch, why do you care what other people think...

Lol.
Your sentence doesn't even make sense. I wouldn't be 'after' confirmation bias, I'd be suffering from or exhibiting confirmation bias.

[DC116710LN]

I find it to be very attractive but it's quite large and expensive. It doesn't have a clear advantage over the Submariner

[kauffee]

Originally Posted by samson66

I like it but lets face it, it's a $30K watch that looks like a hunk of rubber and steel. At that price point there are other more desirable watches IMO.

I would have preferred them to use SS on this one and keep the price down. Using WG doesn't add anything to this particular watch because so little of it is seen.

I think this basically sums it up. I agree that the bezel is awesome. But there’s no reason the case and clasp need to be white gold. Swap for stainless steel and price it about $10k and it would immediately be one of the hot ones.

[SamArj]

Originally Posted by kauffee

I think this basically sums it up. I agree that the bezel is awesome. But there’s no reason the case and clasp need to be white gold. Swap for stainless steel and price it about $10k and it would immediately be one of the hot ones.

Yes, that seems to be what a lot of people say and it makes sense.
But bear with me as I'm trying to understand it a bit better...don't you guys over the pond love your PM watches?
I'm new to this forum but as I've scanned various posts there seems to be a lot of love in the US for solid gold (yellow) Rolex watches which over in the UK most people shun.

So if those solid gold watches are popular at £30k what's wrong with a gold on OF for £23k?

Again, I'm not trying to justify my purchase, I'm genuinely trying to understand the world of Rolex

[szabo_martin]

I like the YM42 more because of the fact that most people don't like it. I wear mine every other day, love the way it looks, the size, and the feel. I love that its WG and on rubber making it casual and less pretentious. There were years they gave the Daytona away as a free gift with purchase, 90% of people love it because they know its hard to get and has a 100% upside. I think for a gold Rolex its priced right, looks great, and it makes me happy so couldn't give a lick about resale or other peoples opinions. Also people drop a load in their pants for a wg sub that costs almost double and looks like SS. Most of the people on this forum are hype buyers, they care about resale and what's the hardest to get watch so they can have a long winded incoming for a watch they make 1M of a year. As long as you like the watch its all that matters. Who cares if the OF lasts 10 years it's $500 for a new strap. A gold link is $750 a piece.

[gnuyork]

YM42 gets a pass from me because it's 42mm. The 40mm YM is one of my favorites.

[maecenas]

It doesn’t get much attention now, probably for the reasons already mentioned here, but for that very reason I think one day it’ll stand out (good or bad) as a almost quirky Rolex that flew under the radar. I have one, and I’ve already had some watch friends see it and say “wow, I forgot Rolex made that, that’s pretty bad a**!”

Anyhow, if you’re new to the watch world, I can definitely understand your desire to understand where it fits in the delicate order of things, maybe even a little fear that you made a “mistake”. But trust me, there is truly no better way to get into watches than to buy something that really sings to you, and wear it without any care towards what others think.

The fact that this one is WG immediately puts it in a different tier, which for lack of a better word I’ll call “elective”. It’s just not for the bulk of Rolex customers, many would see better value in other options. No problem there, you just need to recognize that out of the gate.

[ajmacke]

Everyone has different tastes. For many, it seems the 42mm is too big to be a gentleman's watch. For me, I have a decent sized wrist that can easily support the size.
The YM42 is definitely on my list, and the only YM I'd consider out of the current offering.

[szabo_martin]

It doesn't wear big, you'd be hard pressed to tell the extra mm over the new sub

[SamArj]

Thanks all, some great insights and good to hear from other YM owners.
42mm for me isn't a problem at all. I have 7.5 inch wrists and find 40mm watches can look a little small on me.
In fact my 42mm YM seems to wear smaller than my 41mm DJ....no idea why or if it's just in my head!

[wtp123]

Definitely an underrated Rolex model in the current market. You get a lot of bang for your buck. I tend to shy away from anything bigger than 40mm for personal use just due to my smaller wrist.

[BigAppleBill]

From what I have come to understand, Rolex was reluctant to modify the traditional Submariner too far from its tool watch heritage, which would also risk alienating its loyal Submariner buyers.

The YM line was created as a watch that Rolex designers could incorporate a bit more style into. It was also a sort of proving ground for using different materials like platinum or ceramic bezels, the Oysterflex bracelet, different dial configurations, different case sizes, the glidelock clasp, etc.

I think the YM42 was a way to see if a larger Submariner would have appeal. I think the new 41mm Submariner is a step in that direction and eventually we might see a 42mm Submariner on Oysterflex with glidelock. In my view the Oysterflex bracelet is slightly bulky and requires a slightly larger watch head. IMO the Oysterflex bracelet on the RG YM40 isn’t as pleasing proportionately as it is on the YM42. I was on the fence between the two and ultimately chose the YM42 for a variety of reasons. And by the way, the latest 41mm Submariner case at 12mm is still thicker than the 11.8mm YM42.

[cmanc]

For me the YM42 is a great watch, understated and don't see many in the wild. As to why not much love as noted its seen as expensive when comparted to a SS sub and certainty not hyped up or as well known so not in high demand. I managed to get mine earlier this year in about 4 weeks with a dealer that I had no history with. Given all the constraints for other models I was very surprised, was told there were a few other names on the list, but all out of towners so they offered to a local 1st.

Maybe its time will come who knows but don't really care its a great piece and I enjoy it more everytime I wear it

[Danny83]

I like the watch but prefer the Rosegold 40mm version.

[Seddyspaghetti]

My thoughts are who cares if other’s don’t like it. All that matters is that you do.

[Sthe]

I think it is a very good watch, my father had one in his collection. I always had the urge to put it on.

[Oxfordian]

Originally Posted by SamArj

I purchased a YM42 earlier this year and think it's a lovely watch.
The bezel with a mix of gloss and matt is stunning and the oysterflex bracelet makes it look very 'sporty'. It also wears very comfortably on the wrist.
Yet it doesn't seem to have much of a following.

I'm a newbie to all things horological and so history/heritage is something I'm trying to catch up on. Is the lack of love for this watch because it lacks heritage?

A very close friend (close enough that he doesn't need to spare my feelings lol) said the watch doesn't do much for the money ie it costs £23k but doesn't have a GMT function like a...GMT or deep water credentials like a sub/dssd etc
But he's also not a Rolex fan in general..

Anyway, interested in your thoughts.

Have a good day.

I like it, tried it on at my AD a few weeks back, it is a superb watch.

[Oxfordian]

Originally Posted by greggywatchguy

I think it’s really nice looking, but I think a lot of watches are overlooked because they aren’t what everyone is rabid about at the time.

I think that you are right, doesn’t make these overlooked watches any easier to find at the AD though.