You wrote an essay on why the Daytona is bad. Sounds like you already made up your mind and have no room for consideration.

Why bother?

 

Yeah right?

Also - it's a Rolex sports model. That's all you need to say.

 

First a confession and then a question… just so know that I did read the full post.

Confession: I am probably in the camp who isn't a fan of Speedmaster, to the extent that I think the Speedmaster Pro is an ugly watch. Pls don't come at me for this.

Question: if offered at retail, would you take it or refuse it?

 

For me, the panda is a little bit better than the black dial. If offered to me at retail, I would happily flip the watch for a tidy bit of profit. Your gold Daytona actually addresses one of my issues with the watch because the dial is a lot more legible thanks to the colored sub-dials standing out against the black dial. I also feel the hour and minute hands stand out from the dial more and I really like the red chronograph seconds hand. I think that gold Daytona is discontinued but I have a feeling the price for a used one is not much more than the panda.

Also, it's totally fine if you don't like the Speedy. The Moonwatch is a classic and I've considered it many times, but never pulled the trigger on one. It's like I want it in theory, but when it comes down to it, there are just so many more interesting watches I end up buying or lusting after.

 

It's a very popular watch.

Outside of watch forum enthusiasts most brand orientated people recognise Rolex and how that model is and looks quite expensive, so it can be used as instant validation that some folks have enough £ to buy one. Which whether perceived as crass or not is still a very large reason for many to buy into the brand

Prior to the ceramic models they were predominantly worn by older gents at least in my industry and were sold discounted from retail. But the new ones are more flash and appealing to all genders and cultures so they go with the folks with the matching designer wallets, bracelet jewelry and so on.

As a bonus it's a well made and attractive watch.

 

I happened upon this video by Watchfinder regarding the Daytona that just got uploaded today. I personally find the Daytona unappealing for several reasons, but let's first go over the 5 things the video offers as a critique of it before we go into what irks me about the watch.

1. Lack of a date display - the lack of functionality is annoying, but some people prefer the cleaner look, so I won't count this against the Daytona. I'll never understand the hate for the cyclops; it's quintessential to Rolex.
2. Platinum engraving in the ceramic bezel - It will get dirty over time but this applies to all Rolex watches with ceramic bezel inserts. A soft toothbrush and dish soap is probably the solution here.
3. Polished Center Links - I'm okay with PCL's although these will admittedly get scratched up even with minimal wear. A Cape Cod polishing cloth is an easy DIY solution and when you send the watch in for a service, Rolex will make sure it gets back to you looking nice and shiny again.
4. Screw-down chronograph pushers - Now this, I will agree with Watchfinder on. This really impacts the ease of using the chronograph if you have to keep screwing and unscrewing to use the complication, and will cause excessive wear on the threads. If Omega and even Sinn can offer chronograph actuation underwater, I don't see why the Daytona can't match even the new Chronomat. The Breitling is 200m water resistant without the need for screw-down pushers.
5. Impossible to get - This is true if you're waiting for the AD to give you a call. If you have the money, these are readily available on the grey market.
Now, let me get into why you shouldn't be paying the tens of thousands being asked for this model.

1) The small novel's worth of text on the dial.
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual
Superlative Chronometer
Officially Certified
Cosmograph
They even fit "Daytona" in there between the sub-dials. All this leads to a very cluttered dial that just looks too busy. Other Rolex models also have too much text for their own good, but at least there is space on those dials to let let the words breathe.

2) Poor legibility.
Tying in to my first problem with the Daytona, not only is there a lack of real estate on the dial, the sub-dials themselves are very hard to read and not at all legible. Even just trying to read the time on the black Daytona can be an issue for those with poor eyesight. The panda dial is a little better in this regard, but you pay for that slight bit of better legibility with an even greater premium.

3) The lugs on the crown side are thinner than those at the 9 o'clock side.
Once you see this, you can't unsee.

4) The hour and minute sub-dials are not centered.
Once again, as soon as this registers, you will always realize those two sub-dials shatter the symmetry of the dial and the watch as a whole.

So now that you are aware of all the flaws of the modern steel Daytona, are you still on board the hype train? Vintage Daytonas are actually quite nice and are excluded from my scrutiny. Personally, if I had the budget to hunt for a Daytona on the grey market, I would rather go for something more upscale like the APRO Chronograph. If I wanted to purchase something with heritage, the Speedmaster actually passed NASA's tests and went to the moon, unlike the 'Cosmograph'. It also costs a fraction of what you'd pay for the Daytona.

I love an extensive number of references from the Rolex catalogue. The Pepsi, Batman, Z-blue, Polar, Y-M Blue, DJ 41 Slate... so many sexy watches. But the Daytona? Nah.

Ok.
What was the question again?
It seems like you just stated your own opinion, which of course you are entitled to.

Personally, I wouldn't buy a modern Daytona for a whole host of different reasons, but I don't expect they would be relevant to anyone else.

I've never really understood why some people feel the need to randomly share their personal dislike of something in great detail. Is it a search for validation, a need for support, or are you trying to start an anti Daytona movement?

The hype is simple - more people using different criteria to you want this watch than the number that are readily available at retail. You and others not buying into the hype makes it fractionally easier for everyone else, so they will probably thank you...

SoOoO many watches, SoOoO little time...

 

The hype is simple - more people using different criteria to you want this watch than the number that are readily available at retail. You and others not buying into the hype makes it fractionally easier for everyone else, so they will probably thank you...

SoOoO many watches, SoOoO little time...

Can close the thread right now.

 

The only point I can agree with you on is the legibility with the black dial Daytona. I had one for a couple months and as much as everyone seeing it loved it, I just plain couldn't see it when dark. Lume was almost invisible. I ended up trading it even up for a Yachtmaster, dark blue dial with red second hand. Much easier to read anytime, all the time.

 

In my opinion, you traded up. Love me some Yacht-Master.

 

I don't think people buy it to use as a chronograph.

 

Well, One of the most beautiful watches i've seen in hand was a beige/cream panda Daytona.
If you ask me:
Do you like it? Yes
Would you buy it? No
Why? I don't like Chronos 😎

 

Daytona hype: some dude wore one for a long time, passed away, then his watch sold for millions. Now people want a Daytona, or any sport Rolex in hopes they can cash in years down the road.

 

Funnily enough, I quite like Paul Newman's Daytona.

It has easy to use pump pushers, a nice clean and legible dial, minimal text... even the lugs on either side seem to match!

 

I don’t care for the Daytona for some of the reasons mentioned, but I don’t see anything wrong with it other than just not being my cup of tea. As far as any claims to the lack of symmetry goes, I have yet to see any chrono which is the least bit symmetrical. The very nature of them is asymmetrical. You inevitably have pushers on one side and the sub-dials aren’t the same. The date complication would only make it that much more asymmetrical.

 

I don't care for the Daytona for some of the reasons mentioned, but I don't see anything wrong with it other than just not being my cup of tea. As far as any claims to the lack of symmetry goes, I have yet to see any chrono which is the least bit symmetrical. The very nature of them is asymmetrical. You inevitably have pushers on one side and the sub-dials aren't the same. The date complication would only make it that much more asymmetrical.

I disagree. The Daytona's sub-dials are out of whack. And it looks so cramped. The screw-down pushers also make the entire complication useless to me.

Here's an example of a symmetrical chrono for me:

 

Don't buy it.

Don't talk about it.

Don't make a post about it.

Apathy is the best policy.

I happened upon this video by Watchfinder regarding the Daytona that just got uploaded today. I personally find the Daytona unappealing for several reasons, but let's first go over the 5 things the video offers as a critique of it before we go into what irks me about the watch.

1. Lack of a date display - the lack of functionality is annoying, but some people prefer the cleaner look, so I won't count this against the Daytona. I'll never understand the hate for the cyclops; it's quintessential to Rolex.
2. Platinum engraving in the ceramic bezel - It will get dirty over time but this applies to all Rolex watches with ceramic bezel inserts. A soft toothbrush and dish soap is probably the solution here.
3. Polished Center Links - I'm okay with PCL's although these will admittedly get scratched up even with minimal wear. A Cape Cod polishing cloth is an easy DIY solution and when you send the watch in for a service, Rolex will make sure it gets back to you looking nice and shiny again.
4. Screw-down chronograph pushers - Now this, I will agree with Watchfinder on. This really impacts the ease of using the chronograph if you have to keep screwing and unscrewing to use the complication, and will cause excessive wear on the threads. If Omega and even Sinn can offer chronograph actuation underwater, I don't see why the Daytona can't match even the new Chronomat. The Breitling is 200m water resistant without the need for screw-down pushers.
5. Impossible to get - This is true if you're waiting for the AD to give you a call. If you have the money, these are readily available on the grey market.
Now, let me get into why you shouldn't be paying the tens of thousands being asked for this model.

1) The small novel's worth of text on the dial.
Rolex
Oyster Perpetual
Superlative Chronometer
Officially Certified
Cosmograph
They even fit "Daytona" in there between the sub-dials. All this leads to a very cluttered dial that just looks too busy. Other Rolex models also have too much text for their own good, but at least there is space on those dials to let let the words breathe.

2) Poor legibility.
Tying in to my first problem with the Daytona, not only is there a lack of real estate on the dial, the sub-dials themselves are very hard to read and not at all legible. Even just trying to read the time on the black Daytona can be an issue for those with poor eyesight. The panda dial is a little better in this regard, but you pay for that slight bit of better legibility with an even greater premium.

3) The lugs on the crown side are thinner than those at the 9 o'clock side.
Once you see this, you can't unsee.

4) The hour and minute sub-dials are not centered.
Once again, as soon as this registers, you will always realize those two sub-dials shatter the symmetry of the dial and the watch as a whole.

So now that you are aware of all the flaws of the modern steel Daytona, are you still on board the hype train? Vintage Daytonas are actually quite nice and are excluded from my scrutiny. Personally, if I had the budget to hunt for a Daytona on the grey market, I would rather go for something more upscale like the APRO Chronograph. If I wanted to purchase something with heritage, the Speedmaster actually passed NASA's tests and went to the moon, unlike the 'Cosmograph'. It also costs a fraction of what you'd pay for the Daytona.

I love an extensive number of references from the Rolex catalogue. The Pepsi, Batman, Z-blue, Polar, Y-M Blue, DJ 41 Slate... so many sexy watches. But the Daytona? Nah.

 

They can't resist.

 

Paul Newman...

 

I'll bite. I am not a Rolex fan, I don't hate them I just don't believe they are worth near retail let alone more, that's just insulting to educated persons.
That said, I think it's an overall nice watch but most dial combos are horrible to read. The screw down pushers are actually something I found to be quite cool. The new ceramic bezel is a mistake, can break very easily. The SS was better in my opinion. The fact that it doesn't use Mercedes hands is a major plus, merc hands 🤢🤮. The water resistance is adequate and who is using chronos under water, that's what a diver is for.

 

Saw the WatchFinder video, found his reasons unconvincing. Especially on the screw downs—optional additional water resistance is a good thing IMO. Your criticisms ring truer to me, but not enough to seriously invalidate the watch. It’s a beautifully designed Rolex, would love to have one. Can’t and won’t pay market prices though.

 

Wow I cant beleive the spread. $15.5k retail cdn w/ chrono24 prices as high as $50k. Thats insane.

 

If you owned one you'd understand.

 

Wonder if the OP knows the APROC is even harder to obtain than a Daytona, is selling for over $50k now, has screw down pushers, is a scratch magnet, has lower power reserve and water resistance and doesn’t use an in-house movement.

 

Wonder if the OP knows the APROC is even harder to obtain than a Daytona, is selling for over $50k now, has screw down pushers, is a scratch magnet, has lower power reserve and water resistance and doesn't use an in-house movement.

Blue ROCs are now around $60-65k...

 

1) The small novel's worth of text on the dial.
2) Poor legibility.
3) The lugs on the crown side are thinner than those at the 9 o'clock side.
4) The hour and minute sub-dials are not centered.

1) Doesn't really bother me, at least in this particular case.
2) This is a common cardinal sin of chronographs that I can never overlook, no matter the manufacturer or the value of the watch.
3) This can't possibly be true... can it? It must just be the angle of the photographs... right? Very dificult to believe, but if true it's indeed an instant deal-breaker.
4) This doesn't bother me at all on 3-subdial watches. Leaves more room between the subdials for them to "breathe", so to speak.

 

3) This can't possibly be true... can it? It must just be the angle of the photographs... right? Very dificult to believe, but if true it's indeed an instant deal-breaker.

It is my understanding that stainless steel and two-tone Daytonas have lugs that are thinner on the crown side of the watch. Daytonas in precious metal have symmetrical lugs. I'm not sure the reasoning behind this, but it'll definitely trigger someone's OCD.

Some of the gold Daytona models are actually not too bad.

I've still got issues with it but at least the dial is legible and the lugs are symmetrical.

 

Admittedly I didn't read all the post and to top that off I'm a newbie on the forum. Having said that I can't fathom why anyone would choose a Daytona over a Speedmaster. If money didn't matter at all I still would choose the speedy. Its a better watch in all regards IMO.

 

Oh no. You should read all posts before responding. Unwritten rule.

 

Similar to the hype of the vintage Daytona

 

As part of a chronograph or Rolex collection, a Daytona is a must. If you only want one sports chronograph, there are watches that offer much better value.

 

Good job you don’t like it cos you ain’t never getting one bro 😂

I hate the latest Ferrari for the same reason.

 

Good job you don't like it cos you ain't never getting one bro

Bingo. On behalf of the Never Getting One Club, I raise my glass to you, sir.

 

the white panda dial is actually very good looking rolex
but if only they bump it to 42/42mm it will be perfect.
i normally wear 44 and above watches so still debating with myself to get the daytona or not.

 

Like it, don't like it....don't care. It is what it is.

Personally I quite like how this Speedmaster look on me. The manual winding pro model? Not so much. Too many around and so boring.

 

I'm really considering this Richard - that pop of orange on the bezel is so cool

 

Help me understand the hype behind the modern Daytona

Here you go for the 116500ln:

• AUTOMATIC chronograph with 40mm diameter and 12.2mm thick
• 100m water resistant + screw down pushers for safety
• modern 72h power reserve and Parachrom anti-magnetic balance
• iconic design with panda dial and ceramic bezel
• tachymeter bezel (only useful chrono features are tachymeter and pulsometer, who needs to stop 1/10 second)
• Rolex reliability und service

Show me another chronograph, which can match the specs i marked for you. I even take 60h power reserve.

 

That's just a few arbitrary numbers from the spec sheet. All of Omega's chronographs are swim safe so I don't see how water resistance is relevant.

For the price of the 116500 you can get an AP these days, and that is simply not the same caliber of watch. And I say this as someone who owned, and quickly got bored of the 116520.

 

I’ll pick up one brand new at MSRP in a heartbeat.

If only dreams would come true...

 

I'll pick up one brand new at MSRP in a heartbeat.

If only dreams would come true...

As would most of the "Daytona haters" should they be able.

Its some sort of human way of dealing with things we want but can never realistically achieve.

I have one so I don't have to say I hate it.

 

With the Daytona, you either 'get it'.....or you don't. I've never tried one on, or seen one in the 'flesh'. The people who own one, seem happy enough!