Those were the days.....
I bought a Submariner way back but still obsessed over the 1655 Ex-II.
The ONLY watch regret I've ever had is not buying that one....
These will have to suffice....
Seems like Rolex embodied a different ethos back then, for want of a better word. That's why, save for a couple exceptions, I just can't warm up to most of their current line.
This is what I prefer.
Seems like Rolex embodied a different ethos back then, for want of a better word. That's why, save for a couple exceptions, I just can't warm up to most of their current line.
This is what I prefer. View attachment 14432583
While I appreciate the look and certainly the quality of the current generation of SS Rolex timepieces, I still love the 5-digit pre-ceramic models.
I like the basic look and feel. It's a "Brave New World" out there to be sure but I guess I'm still enjoying the simpler world of the last generation.
The 16710 and 16610 are my favorites.
Probably a good thing for me. The new models simply aren't available to me at prices I am willing to entertain ... so all is good.
Yep always lusted after a 1016 but when I finally got to try one it just felt like a 34mm and not a 36. with my large wrists it just din't work. Strangely the OP 36 wears superbly on me but sadly the 1016 doesn't. Still an awesome watch though. The 5513 is what got me started in Rolex land back in 1975-76. Used to see them in NatGeo when I was 11 years old at school in the library and thought naively I'd get one, not knowing at the time, anything about Rolex. I just thought it was a great looking watch! I was truly gutted when I walked in to the AD in Manchester and was told £308. It took me another 10 years of gazing and saving to finally get my first, a 16800.
Here is the actual page from that very first brochure the sales guy gave me and also above the watch where I wrote the price! Can't believe 43 years have gone by!
Yep always lusted after a 1016 10 years of gazing and saving to finally get my first, a 16800.
Here is the actual page from that very first brochure the sales guy gave me and also above the watch where I wrote the price
There is a reason this is my favorite. The sterile piece of jewelry that Rolex has become just doesn't come close to the embodiment of Rolex of yesteryear.
There is a reason this is my favorite. The sterile piece of jewelry that Rolex has become just doesn't come close to the embodiment of Rolex of yesteryear.
Rolex lost me as a customer when they went to the clown dials, maxi-cases, PCLs on what should be brushed bracelts, etc., etc.
Tudor never did a thing for me; that's what you bought when you couldn't afford a Rolex but wanted to be as near to the cool kids as you could without actually being one of the cool kids.
Alas, my generation is no longer Rolex's marketing focus so people like me are as off their radar as they are on mine.
The five digit watches, IMO, was the golden age of Rolex. I'm glad I have my three, all purchased new - 16233 in 1989, 16610 in 2000, and 16710 in 2006. Save for a gold DD, those made up my holy grail of Rolex watches. Where I live today, the gold DD would have been a poor choice.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
WatchUSeek Watch Forums
22.5M posts
575.5K members
Since 2005
A forum community dedicated to watch owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about watch collections, displays, watch winders, accessories, classifieds, and more! We welcome all manufacturers including Casio G-Shock, OMEGA, Rolex, Breitling, Rolex and Tudor, Seiko, Grand Seiko and others.