- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Whose got a Rolex?
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:14 am to OleWarSkuleAlum
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:14 am to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
Rolex is very new money.
This is both true and false.
A lot of people buy Rolex, because it’s a Rolex and they want to show off. But, that doesn’t mean that they are lacking at all. They are actually a pretty damn good bang for your buck if you can get a SS sports model for retail (it’s difficult, but possible). A friend of mine walked into a jewelry shop and bought a Sub (no date) right out of the case (for retail $7500).
This post was edited on 12/25/19 at 12:18 am
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:14 am to Clyde Tipton
That’s an ugly watch man. Rolex or not.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:16 am to GeorgeTheGreek
Yeah, that looks like shite.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:22 am to TutHillTiger
quote:
I inherited a gold president too.
I meant to mention this before and forgot. (about to get pedantic) While many people call the Day Date a President or a Presidential in Rolex parlance President refers to the band type not the watch. In men's watches they come only on Day Dates (all of which are precious metal like all President bracelets) on women's watches the come on Day Dates and some Datejusts in precious metal.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:22 am to Epic Cajun
I know nothing about watches and don't even wear one anymore. But honestly, I can't get enough of these watch threads.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:26 am to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
That’s an ugly watch man. Rolex or not.
It’s not for everyone. It means something to me.
Handed down from my father.
I basically only wear it for Christmas, Easter, weddings and funerals.
Today just happens to be one of those days.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:35 am to ShermanTxTiger
quote:
It also never keeps accurate time.
It depends on your expectations of a mechanical watch accuracy wise. A 3135 movement from 2003 should keep between -4 and +6 seconds a day at worst. Most when decently regulated will run between 1.5 and 3 seconds fast per day on average. You simply can't get a whole lot better in a mechanical watch movement is a couple of minutes a month of rate error are too much for you then mechanical watches aren't for you. If yours was outside the -4/+6 range it needs regulation or frankly, it does even if it is just to close that bad.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:39 am to Obtuse1
I like that second case second one on bottom. What is that one? The one by the black one.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 12:55 am to elprez00
quote:
Last one has the watch James Bond wore in Dr No which I guess is a submariner. His grandfather was a huge Bond fan and it’s been handed down.
Ian Fleming was known to love Rolex and the Dr. No watch was a 6358 Submariner purported to be Sean Connery's personal watch.
quote:
I know three people that have owned Rolex’s. First two where the first “splash” purchases made when they got their new money. Also was one of the first things to go back when the new money ran out.
This is unquestionably true. But like a Porsche or a BMW it there are a lot of people that buy them for what they are not what they represent to a largely ignorant public.
There are three stages of Rolex appreciation:
quote:
1. Rolex Is The Best (New Guy Version.) The fact that Rolex designs evolve so slowly has done something very important --it's ensured that if you have one on, a disproportionate number of people are going to know you are wearing (a) a Rolex and (b) an expensive watch. The upside is that it can and does say you're a person of means (there is nothing wrong, per se, with conspicuous consumption if that's what you know you want) but the downside is that a certain percentage of observers will conclude, rightly or wrongly, that advertising your affluence is the only (or at least the main) reason you bought the watch. You may have bought a Rolex simply because you've decided you like watches, and you've heard Rolex is a good watch --unfortunately, that's not going to stop some people from assuming you had more ignoble motives. Sooner or later, though, the new owner may wonder why so many self-styled watch experts are sneering, which leads to . . .
2. Rolex Is For Suckers (New Connoisseur Version.) This stage of appreciation --well, of recognition, anyway --is usually the result of one's first exposure to the enormous range of other luxury watch brands, and the onset of suspicion that what you get when you buy a Rolex is an overpriced, uninteresting watch from a company that is too lazy to update its own designs, too rich to risk change, and is generally happiest resting on its generously proportioned laurels. This stage is often marked by a discovery of, and fascination with, the vocabulary of hand-finishing of movements, largely absent in Rolexes; one swoons to the alluring exoticism of côtes de Genève, anglage, oeil-de-perdrix, and the whole rich world of finissage. The awareness that Rolex, rightly or wrongly, is associated with a certain kind of person in many minds --generally male, American, McMansion-owning, loud, golf-obsessed, sartorially challenged and gastronomically undiscriminating, and fond of unnecessarily large and inefficient automobiles --merely serves to confirm the prejudice that unless one wants to be taken for an illbred, reactionary lout, Rolex and all it stands for is best avoided. This stage can persist indefinitely, potentially, but if one continues to inquire one may arrive at . . .
3. Rolexes Are Actually Pretty Good Watches (Grizzled Veteran Version.) There are several paths that can lead to this stage. One observes bemusedly that it is, oddly enough, one's Rolex --usually in the context of being worn when you don't want to wear one of your "good" watches --that seems to keep time best. One observes bemusedly that it is, oddly enough, one's Rolex that seems to be the most free of irritating and expensive prima donna temperamental behavior. One finds, bemusedly, that it is --quelle surprise --one's Rolex which seems to be migrating more and more frequently onto one's wrist, like a faithful Jeeves tolerant as the years go by of the mad whims and fads of its master. One may even find, as I did, that Rolexes are worn by a rather surprising number of watch industry executives working for other brands (on their days off, of course!) and are preferred, for their extremely reliable engineering, by an awful lot of watchmakers. And one discovers that what one thought was lack of personality was merely a refusal on the part of the watch to impose one on you --its very simplicity is what lets it become, as it develops its palimpsest of scratches, marks, and nicks through the slings and arrows of daily use, your watch, and not a brand billboard.
The beauty of this last level of Rolex Appreciation is that it is a temperate one; you are not wearing a Rolex (or refusing to) because of what other people think --good or bad --but because you have made up your own mind, and for your own reasons. You like the watch largely for what it is, not what other people think it means, and you have the very special pleasure that comes from being well informed and doing what you damned well please anyway.
Words stolen from my favorite watch journalist: Full Jack Forster article on the subject
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:13 am to Hu_Flung_Pu
quote:
like that second case second one on bottom. What is that one? The one by the black one.
That is an Audemars Piguet Royal Oak 15400 which I was talking about in the posts about Hublots earlier. The 15400 is the last generation the 15500 is the current one. The newer one released this year looks almost exactly the same save the word Automatic is not on the dial. It has a new in-house 4hz movement (3hz in the 15400) and a longer power reserve, it is also regrettably thicker. Both come in gray white and blue dials in SS.
One crappy pic of mine and one stock pic and a pic of the dial detail (which doesn't even do it justice) the ic is of a 15500 but the dial is the same save the lettering
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:22 am to Obtuse1
quote:
Ian Fleming was known to love Rolex and the Dr. No watch was a 6358 Submariner purported to be Sean Connery's personal watch.
I believe the watch was a modded rolex which belonged to either a grip or camera man.
The common photo which people reference is actually from three movies later when it is on a nylon rather than leather strap. At that point, it is clearly a 6538.
Connery was penniless at the time. The budget for the film was very low, and they borrowed the watch for a few shots.
It's why he hands the watch to Lighter.
The watch auctioned off a few years ago was the later watch from the early Connery movies. It remained constant, but the straps changed constantly. Notably a very under sized striped affair.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:23 am to Obtuse1
I figured it was because of the shape. Those are so cool to me.
I thought about getting a speedmaster pro but I’m not sore I can afford maintenance unless I’ve been told wrong about maintenance on higher end watches.
I thought about getting a speedmaster pro but I’m not sore I can afford maintenance unless I’ve been told wrong about maintenance on higher end watches.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:24 am to Boston911
Rolex Explorer and Day-Date
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:35 am to Boston911
No Rolex here, and not sure I would ever buy one. I think they are great watches, but I’m not a watch “lover” and would not appreciate them for the price.
I have a few citizens and seikos
I have a few citizens and seikos
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:38 am to Eddie Winslow
I have a Bruguet Type XXII Flyback, A Breitling Navitimer and a Rolex Submariner. The Breitling is my favorite but the Bruguet was way more expensive.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:39 am to LSUERDOC
Shouldn't you be on the rant being a racist POS?
You know... Insulting former LSU players for buying their mother a home in a neighborhood you believe they shouldn't be in...
You know... Insulting former LSU players for buying their mother a home in a neighborhood you believe they shouldn't be in...
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:42 am to X123F45
quote:
I believe the watch was a modded rolex which belonged to either a grip or camera man.
The common photo which people reference is actually from three movies later when it is on a nylon rather than leather strap. At that point, it is clearly a 6538.
Connery was penniless at the time. The budget for the film was very low, and they borrowed the watch for a few shots.
It's why he hands the watch to Lighter.
The watch auctioned off a few years ago was the later watch from the early Connery movies. It remained constant, but the straps changed constantly. Notably a very under sized striped affair.
While I have never heard the Seiko theory I do know the Connery connection is tenuous but it is the first told and most often repeated. Cubby Broccoli the producer is the most likely story I have heard and it has also been attributed to the director and a Navy SEAL stuntman on the crew.
The undersized regimental nylon strap that showed up in With Russia for love on a 6538 big crown is the source for even more lore. It was the first movie that has a closeup of his watch.
People are enamored with Bond watches and tomes have been written about them I am only tangentially interested, much less so now when they are simply brand placement ads.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:47 am to Obtuse1
quote:
While I have never heard the Seiko theory I do know the Connery connection is tenuous but it is the first told and most often repeated.
Oh make no mistake, I believe it was an actual Rolex, but it seems to be an amalgamation of parts, not all necessarily from Rolex.
In the special features for Dr. No, they devote a considerable amount of time to the cost cutting measures they were forced to take. One of which the director seeing Connerys cheap watch, spying one he liked on a crew member, and borrowing it for shots.
I've always found it interesting that every bond watch, even the original low budget version, was tailored specifically for bond.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 1:54 am to Hu_Flung_Pu
quote:
I thought about getting a speedmaster pro but I’m not sore I can afford maintenance unless I’ve been told wrong about maintenance on higher end watches.
Chronographs are more to service than 3 hand watches. Full service on a Speedy Pro from Omega is about $750 now but you can safely run out to 7 years so basically $100 a year. A good independent watchmaker that does the manual Speedy Pro movement often will run 500-600.
SHHHH don't tell anyone but I am well over 10 years on some of my watches and I can service some of them myself. This is a do as I say not as I do situation but with modern lubricants in a watch with modern manufacturing tolerances they can go much longer than "recommended", think 3000-mile oil changes for comparison. Note I am kinda insuring myself in that with all the time and money I save extending the recommended service intervals I can afford to replace some parts and still be way ahead when you are talking about 60 watches. Plus I have a Timegrapher (a machine the "listens" to the watch movement and displays things like beat error, amplitude and rate) by checking them once a year or so I can "see" issues starting that allows me to prevent damage with a service.
Posted on 12/25/19 at 2:38 am to Obtuse1
Very nice collection.
I appreciate your depth of knowledge.
Merry Christmas.
I appreciate your depth of knowledge.
Merry Christmas.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News