ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

jameshe · 30 August 2009, 01:54 AM

Hey guys, I was just searching 'Rolex day date' in google to try and get some price estimates (i wasnt looking for this particular combo) when I came across this... and the '3 star' review that came with it

http://www.watchsavings.com/Rolex-Oy...ource=GB&id=uk

Being diplomatic and all, of course everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, read the bottom review and some of the words it calls out when critiqueing the day date platty ('basic features - only day and date', 'not as accurate as my casio or cell phone' etc etc!):

3 Stars (out of 5)

"The good:

It tells time okay. It isn't as accurate as my Casio watch with Waveceptor, that calibrates itself by radio signal from the atomic clock in Ft. Collins. In fact it isn't quite as accurate as my cell phone. But oh well.

The sapphire crystal resists scratches pretty well, but the platinum case, not so much. Be careful with it! I would take it off if you are going to work on the car, for example.

The bad:

It is a little thick, and definitely heavy. It isn't uncomfortable to wear, but if you want a slim, light watch, this one is not for you.

The face can be hard to read. The silver case (that is, silver-colored; it is not made of silver), silver band, silver watch face and silver hands can all blur together into a dazzling silver blotch, especially in bright sun, and especially if you are in a hurry. I do not recommend this watch for scuba divers, race car drivers or covert operatives.

It is a little light on features. It just tells the time, day and date. It doesn't tell the current phase of the moon, the tides or what have you. It doesn't have altimeter, compass, chronometer, stopwatch, lap timer, moon phase, countdown timer, or anything else that even a Casio Ironman has. It is just a pretty basic watch.

The fact that it is made of platinum is cool, but really, it looks just like sterling silver. In fact it doesn't look all that different from stainless steel. Maybe knowing it is made of platinum will give you a little bit of extra swagger, but don't expect people to ooh and ahh over it. In fact, people will generally assume it is either a fake Rolex or a knock-off from Casio or whatever. But maybe you like that.

Summary:

It is a fairly basic watch that functions okay, not great. Readability could be better. It doesn't look particularly distinctive, which might be good or bad."

I guess the guy made a really poor purchase decision when deciding to hand the $50k over, no?

Brushpup · 30 August 2009, 02:06 AM

Hilarious.......

But truthfully, he does have a point about the altimeter.

Thanks for posting this review, tickled me as well.

Patrick

padi56 · 30 August 2009, 03:49 AM

Well in many ways he is telling the plain and simple truth and he is 100% correct regarding the accuracy etc.

Perdu · 30 August 2009, 08:19 AM

Seems very factual to me.

The GMT Kid · 30 August 2009, 01:06 PM

All of my Rolex watches are more accurate than my cell phone which usually seems to be off by a few seconds. I've never had a digital watch that could be regulated by the position you store it in, so I was setting my digital watches more often.

Maybe I'm not reading this right...

30 August 2009, 01:54 AM	#1
jameshe "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: James Location: UK Watch: AP ROC, SkyDweller Posts: 812	This review tickled me!... Hey guys, I was just searching 'Rolex day date' in google to try and get some price estimates (i wasnt looking for this particular combo) when I came across this... and the '3 star' review that came with it http://www.watchsavings.com/Rolex-Oy...ource=GB&id=uk Being diplomatic and all, of course everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, read the bottom review and some of the words it calls out when critiqueing the day date platty ('basic features - only day and date', 'not as accurate as my casio or cell phone' etc etc!): 3 Stars (out of 5) "The good: It tells time okay. It isn't as accurate as my Casio watch with Waveceptor, that calibrates itself by radio signal from the atomic clock in Ft. Collins. In fact it isn't quite as accurate as my cell phone. But oh well. The sapphire crystal resists scratches pretty well, but the platinum case, not so much. Be careful with it! I would take it off if you are going to work on the car, for example. The bad: It is a little thick, and definitely heavy. It isn't uncomfortable to wear, but if you want a slim, light watch, this one is not for you. The face can be hard to read. The silver case (that is, silver-colored; it is not made of silver), silver band, silver watch face and silver hands can all blur together into a dazzling silver blotch, especially in bright sun, and especially if you are in a hurry. I do not recommend this watch for scuba divers, race car drivers or covert operatives. It is a little light on features. It just tells the time, day and date. It doesn't tell the current phase of the moon, the tides or what have you. It doesn't have altimeter, compass, chronometer, stopwatch, lap timer, moon phase, countdown timer, or anything else that even a Casio Ironman has. It is just a pretty basic watch. The fact that it is made of platinum is cool, but really, it looks just like sterling silver. In fact it doesn't look all that different from stainless steel. Maybe knowing it is made of platinum will give you a little bit of extra swagger, but don't expect people to ooh and ahh over it. In fact, people will generally assume it is either a fake Rolex or a knock-off from Casio or whatever. But maybe you like that. Summary: It is a fairly basic watch that functions okay, not great. Readability could be better. It doesn't look particularly distinctive, which might be good or bad." I guess the guy made a really poor purchase decision when deciding to hand the $50k over, no?

30 August 2009, 02:06 AM	#2
Brushpup "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Real Name: Patrick Location: Texas Watch: what I'm wearing Posts: 5,943	Hilarious....... But truthfully, he does have a point about the altimeter. Thanks for posting this review, tickled me as well. Patrick __________________ *TRFs "AFTER DARK" Bar & NightClub Patron-Founding Member* PClub # 10 74,592 The safest place for your watch is on your wrist.

30 August 2009, 03:49 AM	#3
padi56 "TRF" Life Patron Join Date: Jun 2005 Real Name: Peter Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng Watch: ing you. Posts: 53,063	Well in many ways he is telling the plain and simple truth and he is 100% correct regarding the accuracy etc. __________________ ICom Pro3 All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only. "The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever." Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again. www.mc0yad.club Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder

30 August 2009, 08:19 AM	#4
Perdu "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Real Name: Gary Location: GMT-6 Watch: GMT Posts: 3,350	Seems very factual to me. __________________ Omega Seamaster 300M GMT Noire Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 8500 Benson 1937 Sterling Silver Hunter

30 August 2009, 01:06 PM	#5
The GMT Kid Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: S.F. Peninsula Watch: what you say! Posts: 815	All of my Rolex watches are more accurate than my cell phone which usually seems to be off by a few seconds. I've never had a digital watch that could be regulated by the position you store it in, so I was setting my digital watches more often. Maybe I'm not reading this right...

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