Rolex Sky-Dweller 2012

Posts
288
Likes
142
No need to sugar coat it rbird we're all adults here , tell us what you really think ( he said, as he quietly tiptoes out of the room ) !
Sorry, not a fan of roman numerals on watches and the whole dial/case combo just really bothers me.
 
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,631
The one thing I like about these is they don't do radial flip with the numbers / numerals. It's a constant rotation - none turn over at the bottom of the dial.
 
Posts
30,339
Likes
36,030
The one thing I like about these is they don't do radial flip with the numbers / numerals. It's a constant rotation - none turn over at the bottom of the dial.
Yea that's always been something that confused me, its one thing for tachymetre bezels as they're out of your normal vision but Rolex do tend to make a point of keeping the orientation on both romans and arabics consistent. At the same time, Rolex kind of tried it both ways with the Daytona, inverting the chrono hours register 6 for some models in the Zenith era then reverting it back, in a subdial it never looks right.
 
Posts
2,144
Likes
2,493
I think Ashley is right. It could be the "new 3135", minus whatever module is underneath it in that photo.

The Sky-Dweller has received ton of negative remarks on ΩF and other sites, and frankly, I don't think it deserves the hate. The design itself seems a very "safe" evolution of the DDII with added complications. Although the appearance is not particularly revolutionary or exciting, I think they're still going to make quite a few sales to the Rolex crowd. Over all, I find it much more classy than something like the YMII.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the off-center GMT ring and how it cuts in to the Romans. I'm not sure why they choose to display the full ring when a single viewing window would be far cleaner and un-clutter the dial.

Edit: Also, for the same price you could get a Patek
 
Posts
30,339
Likes
36,030
We're talking about the Patek comparison, but once you start looking at the JLC annual calendar comparison, the value position gets even worse, and who in their right mind would take a complicated Rolex over a complicated JLC?
 
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,631
Most of us are probably exaggerating our view. I'd certainly rather have that Rolex than a Big Bang, any Jonny Sonbul, U-boat, or whole line of Invicta watches.
 
Posts
2,144
Likes
2,493
Most of us are probably exaggerating our view. I'd certainly rather have that Rolex than a Big Bang, any Jonny Sonbul, U-boat, or whole line of Invicta watches.
What about Cartier? Panerai? 😀
 
Posts
30,339
Likes
36,030
I'd say something but I'm not allowed to comment on Cartier anymore 🙁
 
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,631
What about Cartier? Panerai? 😀

There are a couple Cartier models I wouldn't mind having, especially a tank. And some of the older 40 mm Panerai with blue dials (069, 119/120, 282/283) are actually good looking watches as well as the black waffle dialed 40 mm Luminor. I wouldn't pay the kind of money that either brand seems to command though.


I'd say something but I'm not allowed to comment on Cartier anymore 🙁
Well that's no fun!
 
Posts
146
Likes
121
Not a Rollie fan but this isn't too bad. The name is ridiculous but the face isn't bad. Ditch the fluted bezel and the oversized numbers and put it into a Breguet case in white gold with a silver center ring and you have a winner. A subtle way of saying that Breguet would have done it justice.