WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi. I'm Matthew in Florida. New to the forum thing. I would like your opinion on something that really prevents me from seriously considering this amazing brand.

I want to love Rolex watches, I mean they are beautiful. But when I see them at the AD, at least the few they have in stock, I'm always disappointed. Let me explain.

Why do they make the case back so thick? I mean really. Their case would be 1/3 thinner and sit much better on the wrist if it wasn't jacked up on a huge case back. For example, I tried on the OP 39 which I absolutely love in pictures but on wrist felt like a tower. I mean 39mm x 11mm+? I think a brand as fine as Rolex can do better than that. For comparison here are a few watches that I am interested in, all of which have a better, width to height ratio.
Hublot Classic Fusion(Not everyone's favorite brand, but tihs particular watch blew me away when I tried it on) 42mm x 10mm with a much slimmer case back. I tried this on literally right after an OP39 and the way it sits so low on the wrist blew the OP out of the water. A couple others are Vacheron Overseas 4500 41mm x 11mm,
AP Royal Oak, 15400 41mm x 9.8mm, even the $1600 Monta Triumph is 38.5mm x 9.5mm. What gives?

Once you've tried on a few that fit like a dream, it's disappointing to me every time I try on a Rolex.

Another watch that is out of my league, but illustrates my point is the Patek Nautilus at 40mm x 8.3mm. Come on Rolex!

Would love to hear opinions on this topic!

Thanks,
Matthew
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
467 Posts
I came to Rolex from Omega and Blancpain... Coming from those monstrosities, the case thickness on a Rolex (Sub, GMT, Explorer, Daytona, OP) seems perfect! They all fit under a shirt cuff just fine. And I find the typical Rolex case to be a very comfortable wear. To each his own, I suppose. Good thing we all have so much choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,386 Posts
Hi. I'm Matthew in Florida. New to the forum thing. I would like your opinion on something that really prevents me from seriously considering this amazing brand.

I want to love Rolex watches, I mean they are beautiful. But when I see them at the AD, at least the few they have in stock, I'm always disappointed. Let me explain.

Why do they make the case back so thick? I mean really. Their case would be 1/3 thinner and sit much better on the wrist if it wasn't jacked up on a huge case back. For example, I tried on the OP 39 which I absolutely love in pictures but on wrist felt like a tower. I mean 39mm x 11mm+? I think a brand as fine as Rolex can do better than that. For comparison here are a few watches that I am interested in, all of which have a better, width to height ratio.
Hublot Classic Fusion(Not everyone's favorite brand, but tihs particular watch blew me away when I tried it on) 42mm x 10mm with a much slimmer case back. I tried this on literally right after an OP39 and the way it sits so low on the wrist blew the OP out of the water. A couple others are Vacheron Overseas 4500 41mm x 11mm,
AP Royal Oak, 15400 41mm x 9.8mm, even the $1600 Monta Triumph is 38.5mm x 9.5mm. What gives?

Once you've tried on a few that fit like a dream, it's disappointing to me every time I try on a Rolex.

Another watch that is out of my league, but illustrates my point is the Patek Nautilus at 40mm x 8.3mm. Come on Rolex!

Would love to hear opinions on this topic!

Thanks,
Matthew

Well, part of it has to be movement thickness. I am sure a lot of the difference is there and with shock protection. I would not trade the robustness of the Rolex movement to save a millimeter or two, especially when you consider that Rolex is thinner than both Omega and Grand Seiko. But if thickness is your main criteria, there are many brands that fit the bill. Maybe Rolex will never be for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I think I would prefer if they just increased the thickness of the mid case to accommodate movement, shock protection, etc., rather than have a large case back. Just redistribute the thickness I guess, lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
334 Posts
I came to Rolex from Omega and Blancpain... Coming from those monstrosities, the case thickness on a Rolex (Sub, GMT, Explorer, Daytona, OP) seems perfect! They all fit under a shirt cuff just fine. And I find the typical Rolex case to be a very comfortable wear. To each his own, I suppose. Good thing we all have so much choice.
Well I original came to Rolex from Breitling(!) and in comparison to most of those, every single Rolex (other than the Deepsea) is positively slimline to me! Even my SD43 is thin compared to a Breitling Seawolf or an Omega POC.

To the OP, you have to remember than Rolexes originated as tool watches, so robustness and WR were massively important when (in the case of a dive watch) your life depended on it functioning perfectly. Obviously the watches have moved on in terms of function, but the aesthetic has continued and most people like Rolex because of that aesthetic, not in spite of it. Personally I'd hate Rolexes to be any thinner than they are. IMO they get it just right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,285 Posts
I think I would prefer if they just increased the thickness of the mid case to accommodate movement, shock protection, etc., rather than have a large case back. Just redistribute the thickness I guess, lol.
Tudor do this and it makes them wear MUCH thicker.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,297 Posts
Hi. I'm Matthew in Florida. New to the forum thing. I would like your opinion on something that really prevents me from seriously considering this amazing brand.

I want to love Rolex watches, I mean they are beautiful. But when I see them at the AD, at least the few they have in stock, I'm always disappointed. Let me explain.

Why do they make the case back so thick? I mean really. Their case would be 1/3 thinner and sit much better on the wrist if it wasn't jacked up on a huge case back. For example, I tried on the OP 39 which I absolutely love in pictures but on wrist felt like a tower. I mean 39mm x 11mm+? I think a brand as fine as Rolex can do better than that. For comparison here are a few watches that I am interested in, all of which have a better, width to height ratio.
Hublot Classic Fusion(Not everyone's favorite brand, but tihs particular watch blew me away when I tried it on) 42mm x 10mm with a much slimmer case back. I tried this on literally right after an OP39 and the way it sits so low on the wrist blew the OP out of the water. A couple others are Vacheron Overseas 4500 41mm x 11mm,
AP Royal Oak, 15400 41mm x 9.8mm, even the $1600 Monta Triumph is 38.5mm x 9.5mm. What gives?

Once you've tried on a few that fit like a dream, it's disappointing to me every time I try on a Rolex.

Another watch that is out of my league, but illustrates my point is the Patek Nautilus at 40mm x 8.3mm. Come on Rolex!

Would love to hear opinions on this topic!

Thanks,
Matthew
Yes, Rolex is not for you. Try Patek.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,883 Posts
You are looking at a situation where it simply is what it is. Rolex at heart is a "tool watch" company and even their traditional watch lines outside of Cellini reflect that DNA. As a result, the traditional watch line is thicker than they have to be. On the professional side Rolex tends to be on the smaller/thinner side compared to its analogs from other brands. As for mid-case vs caseback thickness, I normally will accept a little more caseback thickness since it tends to sit down in the skin vs the mid-case height which is always visually present. I admit to not being very sensitive to thickness as I wear thin sports watches like the RO, Nautilus, and Aquanaut right along with Panerai Submersibles, Planet Oceans, and BP 45mm Fifty Fathoms and then even thinner dress watches, maybe I am lucky or maybe I am just tolerant.

You have simply found that Rolex cases just don't fit you the good thing is there are quite a few significantly thinner sports watches out there and while Patek and AP have a price point well over Rolex there are several that have prices inline or lower than Rolex. We have all had watches we wanted but it came down to an "if they just..." situation, sometimes you just have to move on and find what works for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,765 Posts
All the other brands you listed have been designed to be slim from the get go, especially the AP and Nautilus, and all are exercises in aesthetics rather than as a practical watch. Rolex designs incorporate specific water resistance and a resulting ”Oyster” case design that’s part of that WR. Certainly some would agree that the era of the 6 digit Rolex Maxi case meant the loss of some of the better proportions and no better illustration of that comes with the Explorer II series where the transition from the 5 digit to 6 digit is extremely noticeable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,588 Posts
Better have your flame suit on OP lol. I actually find Rolex cases to be superb with the thickness. I've had some Thick watches (PO 8500) and Rolex was much much better. The caseback has to be substantial due to the water resistance to all their watches. Some of then are much thicker (Sea Dweller). You can try AP or Patek if you want sub 10mm cases
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,498 Posts
A thick case back can better resist pressure without deforming. Making the mid case larger and the case back thinner would actually make the watch less robust. And as someone else point out, will make it seem even thicker (just try on the Tudor Black Bay dive watch).
 
  • Like
Reactions: iTreelex

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Movement height and necessary water resistance. All there really is to it. The engineers may decide they may want a little more thickness to be far more comfortable with 300mm, as opposed to the minimum. The sea dwellers for example, much thicker due to the pressure resistance requirement. Everyone just does it a bit differently. A movement is designed, and then a case around it which is robust enough to withstand x amount of pressure. They definitely do their best to make it thin, yet reliable from an engineering standpoint.

My Monta OceanKing Time Only, roughly 11.45mm thick. 300m. They also sell the triumph, same movement, with an overall thickness of about 9.8mm if I recall correctly. Another consideration is the divers bezel. In reality you need a good 2-3mm tall bezel to get a decent enough grip on it, especially if it's truly being used with a dive suit.

(Gilt)


Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
475 Posts
Hi. I'm Matthew in Florida. New to the forum thing. I would like your opinion on something that really prevents me from seriously considering this amazing brand.

I want to love Rolex watches, I mean they are beautiful. But when I see them at the AD, at least the few they have in stock, I'm always disappointed. Let me explain.

Why do they make the case back so thick? I mean really. Their case would be 1/3 thinner and sit much better on the wrist if it wasn't jacked up on a huge case back. For example, I tried on the OP 39 which I absolutely love in pictures but on wrist felt like a tower. I mean 39mm x 11mm+? I think a brand as fine as Rolex can do better than that. For comparison here are a few watches that I am interested in, all of which have a better, width to height ratio.
Hublot Classic Fusion(Not everyone's favorite brand, but tihs particular watch blew me away when I tried it on) 42mm x 10mm with a much slimmer case back. I tried this on literally right after an OP39 and the way it sits so low on the wrist blew the OP out of the water. A couple others are Vacheron Overseas 4500 41mm x 11mm,
AP Royal Oak, 15400 41mm x 9.8mm, even the $1600 Monta Triumph is 38.5mm x 9.5mm. What gives?

Once you've tried on a few that fit like a dream, it's disappointing to me every time I try on a Rolex.

Another watch that is out of my league, but illustrates my point is the Patek Nautilus at 40mm x 8.3mm. Come on Rolex!

Would love to hear opinions on this topic!

Thanks,
Matthew
Rolex aren't thick watches. See Grand Seiko for comparison.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
Top