WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am on the verge of getting myself a Rolex GMT-Master ii BLNR watch next month. Actually, to be more exact, I am 80% sure of getting one as I am still kinda debating between getting the BLNR or a Rolex Daytona stainless steel watch, which is the other 20%. You see, at first, I wanted to get the Daytona SS so that I can have each version of them in SS, TT, YG as I already have the Daytona in TT and YG already. Both of them with the Rolex Modified El Primero Zenith movements. Anyway, when I saw the Rolex GMT-Master II BLNR, I suddenly got struck by it that all of a sudden, it came to the equation of me either getting it or the Rolex Daytona SS. At first, it was a 50-50 tie between the BLNR or the Daytona SS but as time goes by, I seem to be leaning towards the former. I know that the Daytona is more of an icon and has more history to it but there is something with the BLNR, which I cannot explain that draws me to it. Also, one thing going for the BLNR is that I feel that I can see the time much easier that I would with the Daytona as it's dial is somewhat more legible. For your information, I am 55 years old already and my vision isn't anymore as good as when I was younger that I need glasses nowadays to read. I might be wrong but it also seems that the BLNR is more rugged and is a bit better everyday watch. My question to you guys out there, do you think that I would be making the right decision if ever I choose the BLNR over the Daytona in spite of the latter's history? Or it would be better to have a Daytona in 3 versions, SS, TT and YG? The last 2, I already have. If you were in my shoes, what would you most likely choose between the BLNR and Daytona?Another information, aside from owning a TT and YG Daytona, I also have DD I, Submariner TT Blue, GMT i SS Pepsi Rolexes.
THANKS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,501 Posts
Welcome to the forums! I like the living/interactive aspect of chronographs, so I would opt for the Daytona if I were already going to spend GMT money... That said, if it were my money, I'd opt for the Explorer (I) over either...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,104 Posts
I prefer the appearance of the BLNR, out of these two. However, I prefer Watches without a Date Feature. A Chronograph feature is clearly not essential, but cool to have. A Tough one. I agree with mpalmer's suggestion to look at a Rolex Explorer. Or perhaps even a Rolex Milgauss or a Rolex Oyster Perpetual.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,545 Posts
Don't agree with any comment that any Rolex is everywhere.

You mentioned "history" several times: one has a lineage as a chronograph that didn't use an in house movement, cheap, unoriginal and a chrono within a sea of existing chronos. One has lineage from the first GMT 4th hand complication watch ever. So then could be debated within popular culture, the Daytona is more recognized due to motorsports and pop cultural. Could also be debated within watch culture, the GMT has more Rolex heritage and horological significance.

Either way, both awesome but if you're 80% sure, that means in your own mind you find the BLNR 4x more appealing than the Daytona SS. Even if you have to go grey, you can get a BLNR for near MSRP+tax price point vs a +30-40% premium. Also should decide if you choose to feed that game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
I am on the verge of getting myself a Rolex GMT-Master ii BLNR watch next month. Actually, to be more exact, I am 80% sure of getting one as I am still kinda debating between getting the BLNR or a Rolex Daytona stainless steel watch, which is the other 20%. You see, at first, I wanted to get the Daytona SS so that I can have each version of them in SS, TT, YG as I already have the Daytona in TT and YG already. Both of them with the Rolex Modified El Primero Zenith movements. Anyway, when I saw the Rolex GMT-Master II BLNR, I suddenly got struck by it that all of a sudden, it came to the equation of me either getting it or the Rolex Daytona SS. At first, it was a 50-50 tie between the BLNR or the Daytona SS but as time goes by, I seem to be leaning towards the former. I know that the Daytona is more of an icon and has more history to it but there is something with the BLNR, which I cannot explain that draws me to it. Also, one thing going for the BLNR is that I feel that I can see the time much easier that I would with the Daytona as it's dial is somewhat more legible. For your information, I am 55 years old already and my vision isn't anymore as good as when I was younger that I need glasses nowadays to read. I might be wrong but it also seems that the BLNR is more rugged and is a bit better everyday watch. My question to you guys out there, do you think that I would be making the right decision if ever I choose the BLNR over the Daytona in spite of the latter's history? Or it would be better to have a Daytona in 3 versions, SS, TT and YG? The last 2, I already have. If you were in my shoes, what would you most likely choose between the BLNR and Daytona?Another information, aside from owning a TT and YG Daytona, I also have DD I, Submariner TT Blue, GMT i SS Pepsi Rolexes.
THANKS.
OP - it’s been 4 years. Update us with your decision. Cheers!
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top