# Steinhart and Rolex owners step inside.



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

Hello all, new to your great forum here and am considering a purchase from Steinhart shortly. I am seeking the input of members who own (or owned) a Steinhart Ocean 1 GMT and a Rolex GMT Master or Master II. I'm not foolishly looking for direct comparison as I know this is not really possible, but more for a comparison of intangibles such as wrist presence (not brand presence), functionality, durability, etc. I am new to the forum, but not watches and have experience with Rolex as I purchased a Submariner new from an AD in the mid eighties and had to sell it a few years later as I really couldn't afford it. I have also owned Omega (Speedmaster automatic, Seamaster automatic chronometer '89 & '90 models respectively) but sold them as well later on. And to head off any "just save up and buy the Rolex, you'll be happier" responses, I am 46 and buy the time I put the money together (even for a used 1968 model) I would be too old to see it let alone enjoy it! 
So to the question, would this be a good surrogate for someone who loves the GMT Master but could not afford one, ever. I have recently picked up a Tissot Seastar 1000 (2005 model) that I am very happy with as a replacement for my Seamaster, I actually like the weight and wrist presence of this better than the Omega. Maybe this will give you an idea of what I'm looking for, kind of cathartic exercise to replace watches in retrospect I should not have gotten rid of in the first place with more affordable options. Any constructive input will be appreciated.


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

First off, welcome to the forum, second off: yes get the Ocean 1 GMT.

If you're looking for Rolex style but not Rolex price, Steinhart is the way to go.

I don't own an Ocean 1 GMT, but I do own an Ocean 1 Vintage Military and I am trying to get an Ocean GMT.

The build quality of them is impeccable and the style is forever.

Here's my Ocean 1 if it helps:


----------



## Overwound (May 15, 2013)

I bought a new Rolex from an AD about ten years ago. I ended up selling it for a different watch and never had another since. The way today's prices are I never will. Steinhart watches aren't the same. Holding a Submariner and an Ocean One side by side you'll see differences. Considering the cost of a Steinhart, most people are happy to give up some refinement for a great watch at a very easily attainable price point. 

Steinhart watches are nice for the money. Neither technical function or quality is equal to Rolex but for a few hundred dollars it's well worth it. 

I say give them a try if it's what you like. Give it a good inspection when it arrives. Don't rush to take the protective plastic off until you go over the whole thing. You can't return for a full refund once that's been taken off. Chances are you'll keep it but I'm just offering advise. I recently bought a OVM and it has a couple of things going on with it that I missed at first and one I noticed right away.


----------



## dcuthbertson (Jan 28, 2012)

Hi 
As someone who had a Steinhart GMT Pepsi, I say definitely get it. It is a fantastic watch and you won't regret it for a moment.
I only sold it to raise funds for my daughters education, but will certainly be replacing it in the future.
It has it all. Wrist presence, looks and above all, quality.
good luck and best wishes, Duncan


----------



## Toothbras (Apr 19, 2010)

I used to have an Ocean1, keep in mind it's 42mm and lugs are 22mm, so it's slightly bigger than the Rolex. Just making you aware for comparison sake


----------



## JerylTan (Jan 21, 2013)

It,s going to be a long wait fr the ocean 1 gmt 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## EDT3 (Apr 19, 2011)

I have both and they are both great. The Steinhart is bigger (42mm vs 40mm) and you can tell it's on the wrist. It's much more substantial. I have to admit the Rolex is the most comfortable watch to wear from my collection. Here's a not so great pic of both. I should have put the Pepsi bezel on the Rolex. I will say the Steinhart is very well worth the price at less than 10% of the Rolex price. It's a well made piece that keeps great time. I've had no issues with any of the four Steinharts I currently own.


----------



## Hasaf (Nov 29, 2010)

Toothbras said:


> I used to have an Ocean1, keep in mind it's 42mm and lugs are 22mm, so it's slightly bigger than the Rolex. Just making you aware for comparison sake


Right, this is the one and only reason I did not purchase a Steinhart GMT. It is just too big. The Rolex is a pretty big watch to begin with and the Steinhart has made it even more unwearable.

If It had been the same size I would have probably have purchased it. If it had been based on the older GMT case I would definitely have purchased it.


----------



## bjshov8 (Dec 18, 2008)

I wore a Rolex sub for a long time and now I also have a Steinhart Ocean Black DLC. I like the quality of the Steinhart and especially like that it is slightly larger than the Rolex. I will try to buy a new GMT when they become available again.


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

JerylTan said:


> It,s going to be a long wait fr the ocean 1 gmt
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


Yes unfortunately I am aware of the current backlog (not the exact numbers mind you) and they do seem to be pushing ordering back to the end of July conservatively. Once I do complete the order I will probably expect 6 months for delivery, maybe more. Is this reasonable from what has been seen? Thanks for all the replies so far as well to everybody!


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

EDT3 said:


> I have both and they are both great. The Steinhart is bigger (42mm vs 40mm) and you can tell it's on the wrist. It's much more substantial. I have to admit the Rolex is the most comfortable watch to wear from my collection. Here's a not so great pic of both. I should have put the Pepsi bezel on the Rolex. I will say the Steinhart is very well worth the price at less than 10% of the Rolex price. It's a well made piece that keeps great time. I've had no issues with any of the four Steinharts I currently own.


Thank you so much for the side by side!! I was not aware of it being slightly larger, but I love big clunky watches anyway!


----------



## phllox (Feb 4, 2013)

I had both (not GMT but submariner versus Ocean 1) - I sold the Steinhart (which can't stand the comparision with the Rolex - qualitatively + look & feel). Fortunately I lost no money as I sold it the price I paid (thanks to the current shortage). I bought the Ocean 1 for a wrong reason and kept dreaming about the Submariner. So at the end, I invested in a second hand No date 2 liner and don't regret the Steiny at all. My focus is now on the GMT Master II - I will save money and will go direct to it.


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

phllox said:


> I had both (not GMT but submariner versus Ocean 1) - I sold the Steinhart (which can't stand the comparision with the Rolex - qualitatively + look & feel). Fortunately I lost no money as I sold it the price I paid (thanks to the current shortage). I bought the Ocean 1 for a wrong reason and kept dreaming about the Submariner. So at the end, I invested in a second hand No date 2 liner and don't regret the Steiny at all. My focus is now on the GMT Master II - I will save money and will go direct to it.


Thank you for the input phllox. I see in your signature that you also own a Christopher Ward C60, do you feel the same about it compared to your Rolex as you did the Steinhart? Or is their something better about the C.W. ? I have looked at the Christopher Ward C60 GMT as well.


----------



## Majmvt (Jan 17, 2010)

While looking for a GMT I ran across the Ocean7 line, specifically the LM -5, especially as the Steinhardts weren't available. I absolutely love the watch. I am a bit sad now as I recently acquired a Rolex GMT Master II so the Ocean7 isn't getting any wrist time.


----------



## phllox (Feb 4, 2013)

swissgmt said:


> Thank you for the input phllox. I see in your signature that you also own a Christopher Ward C60, do you feel the same about it compared to your Rolex as you did the Steinhart? Or is their something better about the C.W. ? I have looked at the Christopher Ward C60 GMT as well.


The hard fact is that my C60 is on its watchwinder for quite a wile. However, I tend to consider it is a perfect toolwatch for "heavy-duty" activities. Having said that... the more I look at the C60 the more I feel uncomfortable about its "onion shape" hour hand and its date "placed somewhere around 4th index". CWL fans will claim it's part of its personnality. Well ... I'm still uncertain about it.


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

phllox said:


> I had both (not GMT but submariner versus Ocean 1) - I sold the Steinhart (which can't stand the comparision with the Rolex - qualitatively + look & feel). Fortunately I lost no money as I sold it the price I paid (thanks to the current shortage). I bought the Ocean 1 for a wrong reason and kept dreaming about the Submariner. So at the end, I invested in a second hand No date 2 liner and don't regret the Steiny at all. My focus is now on the GMT Master II - I will save money and will go direct to it.





swissgmt said:


> Thank you for the input phllox. I see in your signature that you also own a Christopher Ward C60, do you feel the same about it compared to your Rolex as you did the Steinhart? Or is their something better about the C.W. ? I have looked at the Christopher Ward C60 GMT as well.


I disagree. The quality of the Ocean One series is outstanding!


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

nealkent said:


> While looking for a GMT I ran across the Ocean7 line, specifically the LM -5, especially as the Steinhardts weren't available. I absolutely love the watch. I am a bit sad now as I recently acquired a Rolex GMT Master II so the Ocean7 isn't getting any wrist time.


Thanks for the input nealkent. I did check out the Ocean7 after I read your post, the high polish lugs and the balloon-esque bezel on the Ocean7 look kinda strange to me. I'm sure in person the bezel may look better than the pictures, and I would brush the lugs on it. I am looking at my options right now in case the Steinharts become unobtainium due to the supply chain problems within the watch industry right now. The Ocean7 will get consideration.


----------



## phllox (Feb 4, 2013)

AlphaWolf777 said:


> I disagree. The quality of the Ocean One series is outstanding!


Well, the quality is probably fine for the price you pay if you prefer. But let me share my experience: 
- when I received my ocean 1, one sprinbar was not fitted in the lug holes (lucky I was to spot it as the watch was about to fall on the tiles)
- the hour hand was not aligned - I mean it was aligned with the hour indexes when the minutes hand was at past 5 minutes
- the bezel was loose to a point I had to return it to Steinhart customer services. When I grabed it between 2 fingers, it was lifting verticaly from the case. The only answer I received was that it was normal to all Ocean series - hence they haven't done anything. They didn't even notice that the hour hand was not aligned.

So you can understand that I have a real question mark on Steinhart quality.

Putting this aside, if you put side by side, hold in your hands, and wear a Steinhart and a Rolex, you will quickly realize that both can't seriously compare, not belonging to the same range. Devil is in details.

Looking at your signature you appear to be a real fan of the submariner design. Is there any particular reason why you haven't bought an original (at least second hand) instead of its numerous copies / hommage (probably for the same amount of money) ?


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

phllox said:


> Well, the quality is probably fine for the price you pay if you prefer. But let me share my experience:
> - when I received my ocean 1, one sprinbar was not fitted in the lug holes (lucky I was to spot it as the watch was about to fall on the tiles)
> - the hour hand was not aligned - I mean it was aligned with the hour indexes when the minutes hand was at past 5 minutes
> - the bezel was loose to a point I had to return it to Steinhart customer services. When I grabed it between 2 fingers, it was lifting verticaly from the case. The only answer I received was that it was normal to all Ocean series - hence they haven't done anything. They didn't even notice that the hour hand was not aligned.
> ...


None of the four Steinharts that I've purchased from them ever had a QC issue. (That's what happened to you; you got a bad Quality Control example).

I haven't ever held a Rolex in my hands so I cannot speak as to whether or not I would think an homage was any significant amount "less quality." I've no doubt that Rolex is obviously higher quality, but look at the price you pay for it anyway. However, all of my homages are IMHO at least comparable to the high quality you see in certain higher price ranges.

Yes, I am a real fan of Rolex designs in general; specifically the Submariner design. I like them because they're simple, useful, tool, dress, dive, military, rugged all at the same time. The true "beach to boardroom" watch. Plus Sean Connery wore one in the James Bond films, and that's what got me into watches in the first place.

The total retail value of my collection is only around $3,500 USD not counting my expensive and extensive strap collection. That's barely enough to buy a Tudor. Not even half way to a Rolex Submariner new; and only about 70% of the way for a used one. Why have I not bought a Sub? Because, I bought all of my watches over the course of several months. If I had $3,500 free easy spending money, I can tell you right now that it wouldn't be dropped on a watch. I wouldn't spend that much money for where I am in life right now. Homages allow me the same experience for less money. It's simple.

-regards


----------



## phllox (Feb 4, 2013)

That's clear. Thanks
I recognize I was on the very same page. However, after months browsing watch addicts forums I jumped the fence and bought a second-hand sub. True it was stressful to pay that amount of money for a watch - but passion is no reason. My problem is now to decide what am I going to do with my other watches and particularely the other divers. I have no clue so far - except I know I'll keep the Longines chrono.


----------



## Todd5774 (Jan 12, 2013)

I have a rolex and a number of Steinharts amongst other high price watches, not the ones that you are discussing though, and although I can say that the high end watches do have more attention to detail and I can see the attraction of having what some people would call the real deal, but I'm heading in the other direction, I'm selling the omegas and the rolex purely based on the knowledge of how much money is tied up in something that dosent get used all that much, I have friends and family who are also doing the same.

Steinhart make a great looking watch at a very affordable price and they are a watch that you can use rather than worry about either will you damage the watch or is it attracting too much wrong attention, I'm all for 'homages' not replicas but watches that take a hint of the original and put their own twist on it.

So is the Rolex better than the Steinhart? Probably, but I get more enjoyment out of my Steinys than the others.


----------



## H.Solo (May 15, 2007)

IMHO Rolex and Steinhart goes very well together... in a very friendly way. I like them all, but when it comes to wearing watches I always take the Steinharts... so I'm with Todd5774 on this one!

Here I got two older pictures from my collection:


----------



## watchdad711 (May 6, 2013)

Wow H.Solo, you actually have one of each in black and green. I'm not judging - I just can't imagine doing that myself. I can only assume the Rolies are more of an heirloom/investment and the Steinies are for enjoyment? Understand this is coming from someone that can't imagine wearing a $10k watch let alone a $400 watch. My O1B is my most expensive watch to date and I'm just starting to feel comfortable wearing that much on my wrist. I guess it's all relative to what you're used to.


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

H.Solo said:


> IMHO Rolex and Steinhart goes very well together... in a very friendly way. I like them all, but when it comes to wearing watches I always take the Steinharts... so I'm with Todd5774 on this one!
> 
> Here I got two older pictures from my collection:


Fine brace of watches! The side-by-sides you fine gentlemen have given me here is most helpful. Keep the thoughts coming!


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

I'm with you Todd. Not interested in replicas, no matter how well built they are. I would rather have the Steinhart that I know has been built to perform instead of a replica that may not be water tight, whether or not it has an authentic ETA movement or not. Also the replica business is theft, pure and simple.


----------



## tatt169 (May 21, 2012)

H Solo- That comparison shot between the ocean green and lv rolex is superb. Not sure if it the lighting but it looks like the rolex dial is a glossier finish which seems to complement the watch better IMO. That being said, I think i would like the rolex even more if the green was the steinhart sahde of green. No doubt there is a lot of watch to be had with any of the ocean series!

Chris.


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

Hello all. Just a little update, amazingly an 2012 Ocean One GMT pepsi bezel was posted for sale a couple of days ago here on the forum by a fellow member. I contacted the seller and was the second (darn!) person to respond. So he said if the deal fell through I was next in line, then same day I got another message from him stating that he and his father had purchased the same watch together back in 2012 and that his dad was interested in selling his as they both had found another watch they wanted! Long story short, I have a LNIB Ocean GMT blue/red inbound!!!! I know, some people have all the luck!  LOL! I am thankful that since I was second in line for his, he hooked me up with his father so we could make this happen. Just a testament to the quality of people on this forum. I will post a picture once I receive it as is required, especially one that contains so much dumb luck! Thanks again to all for your responses to this thread.


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

swissgmt said:


> Hello all. Just a little update, amazingly an 2012 Ocean One GMT pepsi bezel was posted for sale a couple of days ago here on the forum by a fellow member. I contacted the seller and was the second (darn!) person to respond. So he said if the deal fell through I was next in line, then same day I got another message from him stating that he and his father had purchased the same watch together back in 2012 and that his dad was interested in selling his as they both had found another watch they wanted! Long story short, I have a LNIB Ocean GMT blue/red inbound!!!! I know, some people have all the luck!  LOL! I am thankful that since I was second in line for his, he hooked me up with his father so we could make this happen. Just a testament to the quality of people on this forum. I will post a picture once I receive it as is required, especially one that contains so much dumb luck! Thanks again to all for your responses to this thread.


Congrats! It's things like these that will keep you very interested in this very interesting hobby!


----------



## DiscoZ (Jan 9, 2012)

Don't post much - lurk a lot! I've owned 3 Steinharts (all sold now, for various reasons) and I think what you get for the price is phenomenal. I was looking into purchasing a D.Dornblüth & Sohn when I stumbled upon the Steinhart Marine watch and purchased it on a whim. I also own a Rolex Oyster and no one can say the Steinharts come close in quality, but for the price - you are getting a great watch. I will add that one Steinhart I owned had an issue with the crown sticking a bit - however they offered to fix it and pay for shipping.


----------



## Fullers1845 (Nov 23, 2008)

Congrats, swissgmt. Glad you found one, and now you have a great story to go with it. That's one of the best parts of this hobby--the stories. You're gonna love it!


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

Well It made it! Very happy with the quality, it is definitely value for the money. It really was LNIB with everything as it came from Steinhart. So Happy!


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

swissgmt said:


> Well It made it! Very happy with the quality, it is definitely value for the money. It really was LNIB with everything as it came from Steinhart. So Happy!


Dude, that is seriously sexy! Huge congrats! I get my Aramar GMT on Monday!


----------



## JerylTan (Jan 21, 2013)

AlphaWolf777 said:


> Dude, that is seriously sexy! Huge congrats! I get my Aramar GMT on Monday!


Did you mean the white ocean? Dd u get it new or used. I ordered 1 too few mths back but no news of it yet

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

JerylTan said:


> Did you mean the white ocean? Dd u get it new or used. I ordered 1 too few mths back but no news of it yet
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


Yeah the white Ocean. I bought it used. I was originally gonna buy the Vintage GMT, but when I realized that the white Ocean combines all three styles of the Vintage GMT, regular GMT, and with the added bonus of the white dial like the PanAm GMT or an Exp 2, I knew I had to have it.


----------



## JerylTan (Jan 21, 2013)

AlphaWolf777 said:


> Yeah the white Ocean. I bought it used. I was originally gonna buy the Vintage GMT, but when I realized that the white Ocean combines all three styles of the Vintage GMT, regular GMT, and with the added bonus of the white dial like the PanAm GMT or an Exp 2, I knew I had to have it.


Ohkk. I tot they were finally shipping it out  the wait continues..

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

AlphaWolf777 said:


> Dude, that is seriously sexy! Huge congrats! I get my Aramar GMT on Monday!


Thank you sir! We will need the obligatory photo once you get it in hand! Can't wait to see it. b-)


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

swissgmt said:


> Thank you sir! We will need the obligatory photo once you get it in hand! Can't wait to see it. b-)


I will post it in the dive watch forum. I'll PM you a link once I get it! b-)


----------



## bigpoppa822 (Aug 27, 2012)

Aplha actually bought my Aramar GMT because I bought an Explorer II polar. I love the Explorer but I still miss my Aramar. I was initially really unimpressed by the Rolex bracelet because I've become used to solid link bracelets, but the lightness of it is growing on me and it doesn't feel as "cheap" as it did before. Steinhart's quality for the price is amazing though. I never got the chance to have them side by side to compare, but here are a couple wrist shots:


----------



## AlphaWolf777 (Aug 11, 2012)

bigpoppa822 said:


> Aplha actually bought my Aramar GMT because I bought an Explorer II polar. I love the Explorer but I still miss my Aramar. I was initially really unimpressed by the Rolex bracelet because I've become used to solid link bracelets, but the lightness of it is growing on me and it doesn't feel as "cheap" as it did before. Steinhart's quality for the price is amazing though. I never got the chance to have them side by side to compare, but here are a couple wrist shots:


Congrats dude! The Steinhart/Aramar GMT has gone to a good home though! ;-)


----------



## balzebub (May 30, 2010)

One of the watches that i want to save up for and get within the next 5 years was the Rolex Explorer II GMT, but now that I've discovered Steinhart, I might just get the Ocean Vintage GMT instead...


----------



## manofrolex (Jul 9, 2012)

swissgmt said:


> Well It made it! Very happy with the quality, it is definitely value for the money. It really was LNIB with everything as it came from Steinhart. So Happy!


at the end of the day that is what matters you like what you got so enjoy your new watch 

The Rolex like it has been mentioned has probably a better case, a better finish, a better bracelet, a better slightly everything and more than likely you will not deal with QC issues but I am sure it has happened. However, you will also end up paying for everything else that comes with it, advertising, ADs, ambassadors, sponsoring............I would be curious to really see the "true" cost of a Rolex especially based on the numbers they make compared to the Steinhart and then really have an honest comparison. It is way too hard to compare things that are so far apart price wise especially when the prices are so inflated.


----------



## Darwin (Jan 28, 2012)

Another cost of ownership of a Rolex to factor in is servicing, which on a cleaning can run as much as 2x the cost of a new Steinhart, especially if you have Rolex service the piece. I know, have had four serviced (NOT by Rolex) in the past year at a cost ranging from $320 before taxes and shipping back to me to $360 before taxes and shipping. All four watches are vintage (circa 1953 through 1975) Oyster models, but not divers. Divers are, as I understand it, roughly twice the cost. Rolex will charge about 1.5 to 2x as much to service that same watch. Now, in fairness the servicing of an ETA in Canada will run a minimum of about $150 from a reputable online watchmaker like Archer, so still pricey. I've had work done locally for about $80 (on a Rolex!) within the last five years, but all of the watchmakers around me have either shut down shop or refuse to work on waterproof/resistant watches with screw down crowns... BTW another reason I no longer use Rolex service centres is that you have to specify everything that you DO NOT want them to do - relume the dial and hands, restore the case and bracelet, replace the crown and crystal. My 1958 Rolex Everest went in in 1998 completely original and untouched, with the exception of the caseback, which had been refinished to remove an engraving, down to the crown, domed acrylic crystal, and springbars. Looked ligthly used but great for a 40 year old watch. When I got it back it sparkled as new but the springbars no longer matched the case (original springbars had rounded ends that showed through the drilled holes perfectly) and the crown and crystal had been replaced with modern equivalents. As I understand it, the value of the watch (over $6000 at the time for a clean original example - mine was worth less because the case back - the Everest is very rare and quite sought after) plummeted, and I paid for the privilege! When I asked for the original parts to be returned to me I was told that they had been returned to Rolex in Switzerland! If I had known then what I know now, I would have raised a real stink about it, but I left unhappy with the experience.


jmanlay said:


> at the end of the day that is what matters you like what you got so enjoy your new watch
> 
> The Rolex like it has been mentioned has probably a better case, a better finish, a better bracelet, a better slightly everything and more than likely you will not deal with QC issues but I am sure it has happened. However, you will also end up paying for everything else that comes with it, advertising, ADs, ambassadors, sponsoring............I would be curious to really see the "true" cost of a Rolex especially based on the numbers they make compared to the Steinhart and then really have an honest comparison. It is way too hard to compare things that are so far apart price wise especially when the prices are so inflated.


----------



## slavun (Jun 26, 2012)

http://forum.watch.ru/showthread.php?t=108739


----------



## spryken (Jul 22, 2010)

It is a hobby matters we are talking about , and that hobby must be able to be reached by a reasonable price that all of us can afford, to me, what makes me happy is that I understand what I bought and what I'm wearing. Rolex or Steinhart is only a matter of satisfaction. Wearing Rolex without understanding the fine details about it is nothing to be proud of, wearing a Steinhart by knowing what is lack and can be improve makes me happy. It's a very personal satisfaction issue in discussing homage and real deal. Just enjoy what you want to buy and wear it with proud. I'm going to try steinhart in September if their shipping prediction is correct. 
Have fun


----------



## swissgmt (Jun 18, 2013)

Darwin said:


> Another cost of ownership of a Rolex to factor in is servicing, which on a cleaning can run as much as 2x the cost of a new Steinhart, especially if you have Rolex service the piece. I know, have had four serviced (NOT by Rolex) in the past year at a cost ranging from $320 before taxes and shipping back to me to $360 before taxes and shipping. All four watches are vintage (circa 1953 through 1975) Oyster models, but not divers. Divers are, as I understand it, roughly twice the cost. Rolex will charge about 1.5 to 2x as much to service that same watch. Now, in fairness the servicing of an ETA in Canada will run a minimum of about $150 from a reputable online watchmaker like Archer, so still pricey. I've had work done locally for about $80 (on a Rolex!) within the last five years, but all of the watchmakers around me have either shut down shop or refuse to work on waterproof/resistant watches with screw down crowns... BTW another reason I no longer use Rolex service centres is that you have to specify everything that you DO NOT want them to do - relume the dial and hands, restore the case and bracelet, replace the crown and crystal. My 1958 Rolex Everest went in in 1998 completely original and untouched, with the exception of the caseback, which had been refinished to remove an engraving, down to the crown, domed acrylic crystal, and springbars. Looked ligthly used but great for a 40 year old watch. When I got it back it sparkled as new but the springbars no longer matched the case (original springbars had rounded ends that showed through the drilled holes perfectly) and the crown and crystal had been replaced with modern equivalents. As I understand it, the value of the watch (over $6000 at the time for a clean original example - mine was worth less because the case back - the Everest is very rare and quite sought after) plummeted, and I paid for the privilege! When I asked for the original parts to be returned to me I was told that they had been returned to Rolex in Switzerland! If I had known then what I know now, I would have raised a real stink about it, but I left unhappy with the experience.


Other than the price of the watch itself (which is out of reach for me), you pretty much nailed my other trepidation with Rolex. The service costs, which I understand are the price of admission so to speak, are prohibitive. I don't want to be the guy who can barely afford to buy the Porsche, then has to put Mastercraft tires on it because he can't swing the Pirelli's! ;-) Luckily I have a good watchmaker local to me that services my ETA movements for under $100.00, and he's Rolex certified. The GMT complication may be a little more for him to service, but maybe not as he usually takes care of me price wise.


----------



## at2011 (Jan 23, 2011)

I've never owned a Rolex because of the price. I think Rolex has been ripping off the gullible for a very long time. I wear my Steinhart with pride, it's quality exceeds it's affordability.

Rolex preys on people's perception weaknesses as explained in this video:






"Seeing the higher price tag often makes us believe that product is simply better".






"Do you ever ignore the truth to fit in with the group?" 
"If you want to stay safe, stay with the herd"

I hope I didn't offend a lot of Rolex owners, but the fact of the matter is...YOU GOT CONNED!


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

Interestingly, this thread is old but many points still remain valid.


----------



## Shadowlands (Mar 17, 2019)

at2011 said:


> I've never owned a Rolex because of the price. I think Rolex has been ripping off the gullible for a very long time. I wear my Steinhart with pride, it's quality exceeds it's affordability.
> 
> Rolex preys on people's perception weaknesses as explained in this video:
> 
> ...


Hard to argue with that, what does it cost Rolex to make a Sub, $800? My wife and I both own a Rolex DJ, I could afford a Sub easily but don't choose to tie up my money there, Steinhart IMHO is 85% of the Rolex at a fraction of the cost. Most of the difference is cosmetic that won't be noticed. Steinhart can put out a great watch for a reasonable price not having to pay millions for retail locations, advertising in glossy magazines, and celebrity endorsement contracts. Like Rolex, my Steinhart has:

316 steel as many Rolex watches used to have, IMHO the new 904 steel is a marketing gimmick with no real-world advantage.
Swiss made movement at 8 steps a second, keeps better time than my Rolex
Water resistant to 1,000'
Sapphire crystal

I like that the Steinhart has a 39mm size that fits my 6.5' wrist better, no frilly rehaut engraving, and can be modified with no worries. Yes Rolex has better QC I'm sure, but since Steinhart stands behind their product very well for those rare instances, who cares? Rolex isn't perfect, I was on their forum the other day and a guy had a new Rolex that lost 7 SPD when the weather warmed up. Have also heard unpleasant stories of RSCs damaging watches.

Unless you have to have the crown and live amongst similar people, save your money. Steinhart is what Rolex Subs used to be, a quality tool watch for a reasonable price. Rolex now is basically very expensive jewelry.


----------



## TheGanzman (Jan 12, 2010)

My last Rolex Submariner - and I MEAN my (very) last Rolex Submariner - a 4 line 14060 - was not correctly "indexed" all the way around the dial; either that or the movement wasn't "indexing" correctly all the way around the dial. What I mean by that is that the minute hand would stop EXACTLY at the center of any given minute, then one minute later it would be "off" by a fraction. I'll never forget sitting there and recording the # of times in one hour that it didn't index correctly - how 'bout 5-6 times! After seeing that I could never "unsee it" - G'bye!

I used to believe all the "hype" about the premium brands - no more! Lemme see - exactly how many Steinhart televised ads were on Wimbledon? When was the last time that Steinhart sponsored a Grand Prix? "Value Added"? Yeah - added value to Rolex...

Having said that, people are sheeple by and large - they NEED reinforcement for almost EVERYTHING, so they look around at what others are doing, then go and do likewise - to be "different". My friend got a tattoo? Now *I* gotta get a tattoo (X's 100, it seems lately). My friend bought a BMW? *I* gotta get a BMW. Luckily for myself, I've been an outlier for MOST of my life; in fact, the only times that I HAVEN'T, and have followed the crowd/succumbed to my ego, I've regretted it. Well, except for the time somebody yelled "Fire!" - then I hightailed it out of the building like ever'body else...

At the end of the day, buy what makes you feel happy; I haven't seen a hearse YET with a trailer hitch on it!


----------



## Shadowlands (Mar 17, 2019)

I also like the fact Steinhart's have tinted crystals, makes them more readable.


----------



## johnMcKlane (May 14, 2017)

I have the ocean 39.... sometime I really like it and sometime I feel like a fraud....


----------



## hooperman42 (May 12, 2006)

This is an easy remedy to fix. Simply go to your authorized rolex dealer plunk down 11K and there you go. Feel better?


----------



## hooperman42 (May 12, 2006)

Any watch that "makes you" send it in on a regular basis to get cleaned and "serviced" with it's 75 different unique oils in playing you like a food... I had datjusts, a daytona, multiple subs and gets including vintage. Many very much worth the price when my sub cost $ 1895. NO MO!


----------



## EPK (Nov 16, 2015)

hooperman42 said:


> Any watch that "makes you" send it in on a regular basis to get cleaned and "serviced" with it's 75 different unique oils in playing you like a food... I had datjusts, a daytona, multiple subs and gets including vintage. Many very much worth the price when my sub cost $ 1895. NO MO!


This may not be a perfect analogy but it's the same type of system Ferrari uses. They can require 30k mile services that require engine removal. And, just like Ferrari, there are alternatives that perform just as well for fractions of the cost.

You're paying a premium for the name in both cases. And, for some, they're worth that. YMMV

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## fish70 (Oct 12, 2006)

hooperman42 said:


> This is an easy remedy to fix. Simply go to your authorized rolex dealer plunk down 11K and there you go. Feel better?


Of course they would have to have a watch to sell him.


----------



## johnMcKlane (May 14, 2017)

hooperman42 said:


> This is an easy remedy to fix. Simply go to your authorized rolex dealer plunk down 11K and there you go. Feel better?


I do not have 11k to plunk right now ! I'll keep the Steinhart !


----------



## TheGanzman (Jan 12, 2010)

I categorically do NOT like to be ORDERED on what I MUST do concerning an item AFTER I purchase it - I figger that's MY F-ing bidness! Now if Rolex or Ferrari wants to RENT their good(s) to me, that's different! If a manufacturer wants to OFFER their services to me at a COMPETITIVE price for servicing, that's different; hell, I'll even pay a reasonable upcharge to take it to the maker's representative. I get my Mazda CX-5 serviced at the Mazda Stealership; on the other hand, I get my wife's Acura ZDX serviced at the Honda dealership for ~75% of the cost for the same service(s) that Acura charges. I'll bend over BACKWARDS for many, but I won't bend over FORWARDS for ANY!


----------



## Dec1968 (Jan 24, 2014)

Has anyone tried to fit their Rolex (or Ginault) SEL Oyster bracelet onto a Steinhart 39mm Ocean model? Do the lug holes line up? Does the SEL fit vertically?


----------

