# Project Kingston: Bracelet



## Yao

One of my suppliers is currently working up a bracelet design for your review. However we need to work out the several features of the bracelet:

* Diver's extension: This is used to enable the wearer to make the bracelet larger in order to fit over a wet suit. The drawback of this feature is that it decrease the fine-adjustment of the bracelet. Its a nice feature but can make the bracelet less practical for desk-divers

* "Flip-lock" feature: This is a second "clasp" that folds over the main clasp to keep the bracelet from opening by accident if snagged on something. In the following picture the lock is the part that has my logo engraved on it:










the 6538 bracelet did not have "Flip-lock" feature on the bracelet.

* Do you want the bracelet signed with the Mk II logo?

* Unless there are serious objections I am going to make the bracelet with solid-end links that will mimic the look of the original style bracelet. With solid-end-links we will have to use a standard double flange spring bar (i.e. no old-school Rolex-style spring bar that goes all the way through the lugs). Please note that no matter what the lugs will be drilled through.

The features that have been decided are:

* Screw pins to hold the adjustable links together
* Currently I am working on a riveted style bracelet. We'll have to see how close I can get with incurring a lot of tooling charges. The fallback design will be an "Oyster-style" bracelet much like that seen on the Vantage.

any additional input is also welcome...


----------



## siggy

Bill,

Please go with the Rolex style spring bars, shoulderless like the original. I think it would be a major drawback not to do this when the rest of the watch is looking great.

Can't we have the best of both world's, solid end links and shoulderless bars like the combination Rolex used on the Sea Dweller before Rolex stopped using drilled lugs.

regards

siggy


----------



## bompi

By the way, how will the bracelet be : polished or brushed (my favorite) ?


----------



## GraniteQuarry

Siggy has a good point, it would be very nice to have the heavier Rolex style bars. ;-)

BUT - if planning to use an off-the-shelf solid endlink, i can understand that the standard tube diameter may not make this possible. I imagine the budget would dictate that specific parts won't be possible for all parameters.


----------



## andrewb

I think most people want the look as close to a riveted Rolex1960s bracelet and the quality of a 2009 SEL Oyster bracelet so your spec looks right to me Bill. Riveted SEL without the flip lock and with the divers extension.


----------



## Dave E

I'm ambivalent about the diver's extension, it's not something I want, but I don't mind it being there.

Solid end links, however, are a must. I really don't like folded end links, they feel cheap these days.

(Oh, flip-locks are handy because they make the thing more secure, that's a practical point!)


----------



## GregoryD

I think that solid end links are a must, but that's the only thing I feel really strongly about. I think a diver's extension would be fine, but not necessary. 

By the way, does anyone have pictures of the riveted style bracelet? I'm not familiar with it.

Greg


----------



## brian31

Bill, will the bracelet's width be tapered? I think tapered bracelets, say if 20mm at the lugs, look better if they taper at least to 18mm at the clasp, maybe 16mm like original Rolex bracelets.


----------



## Yao

Actually the bracelet has a stepped taper. At the moment I have designed so that it goes from 20 mm to 18 mm unless people have a strong opinion about tapering to 16 mm.



brian31 said:


> Bill, will the bracelet's width be tapered? I think tapered bracelets, say if 20mm at the lugs, look better if they taper at least to 18mm at the clasp, maybe 16mm like original Rolex bracelets.


----------



## Yao

Here are some pics from MWR.



GregoryD said:


> I think that solid end links are a must, but that's the only thing I feel really strongly about. I think a diver's extension would be fine, but not necessary.
> 
> By the way, does anyone have pictures of the riveted style bracelet? I'm not familiar with it.
> 
> Greg


----------



## MDS

Yao said:


> Actually the bracelet has a stepped taper. At the moment I have designed so that it goes from 20 mm to 18 mm unless people have a strong opinion about tapering to 16 mm.


18mm please


----------



## NWP627

Yao said:


> Actually the bracelet has a stepped taper. At the moment I have designed so that it goes from 20 mm to 18 mm unless people have a strong opinion about tapering to 16 mm.


Bill,
18mm is fine. I believe 16mm will be too narrow in comparison to the thick case.
N


----------



## tallguy

siggy said:


> Bill,
> 
> Please go with the Rolex style spring bars, shoulderless like the original. I think it would be a major drawback not to do this when the rest of the watch is looking great.
> 
> Can't we have the best of both world's, solid end links and shoulderless bars like the combination Rolex used on the Sea Dweller before Rolex stopped using drilled lugs.
> 
> regards
> 
> siggy


Doesn't the SAR use solid endlinks and shoulderless bars?


----------



## Yao

I figured someone would bring this up eventually. This is the reason why I am not going to use shoulderless bars on a solid-end-link bracelet:

MWR-SAR thread

This isn't something that I want to risk dealing with. I have heard stories from other larger manufacturers telling me how they received bracelets that they had to hand fit to their watches (using standard spring bars). So this isn't as easy as it looks. Making them with shoulderless spring bars only raises the stakes.



tallguy said:


> Doesn't the SAR use solid endlinks and shoulderless bars?


----------



## MatKid152

brian31 said:


> Bill, will the bracelet's width be tapered? I think tapered bracelets, say if 20mm at the lugs, look better if they taper at least to 18mm at the clasp, maybe 16mm like original Rolex bracelets.


 18mm, 16 is just too skinny imo


----------



## Rob T

Yao said:


> I figured someone would bring this up eventually. This is the reason why I am not going to use shoulderless bars on a solid-end-link bracelet:
> 
> MWR-SAR thread
> 
> This isn't something that I want to risk dealing with. I have heard stories from other larger manufacturers telling me how they received bracelets that they had to hand fit to their watches (using standard spring bars). So this isn't as easy as it looks. Making them with shoulderless spring bars only raises the stakes.


O.K. but couldn't the spring bar holes still be drilled through the lugs? So that sholderless spring bars can be used with other bands - such as the Bond NATO?

Seems like that would allow for both sholderless Rolex style spring bars, and regular spring bars (best of both worlds).

Rob.


----------



## rcarbonetti

MatKid152 said:


> 18mm, 16 is just too skinny imo


Bill, please taper to 18mm as well.

Robert


----------



## Yao

Yes the spring bar holes will be drilled through no matter what.

The one drawback that I can see with making the lugs compatible with both a shoulderless and double flange style spring bar is that you will need to custom make the spring bars. Usually the shoulderless off the shelf spring bars that will fit into standard double flange holes are so flimsy I don't see the point. To make the shoulderless spring bar hefty enough to mean something will mean that the double flange spring bar will have to have a larger diameter. Ideally the custom made spring bars would be ready in advance of case sampling so that we can ensure that all the parts fit when the time comes.

I usualy shy away from custom spring bars because you end up beholdened to the mfg for the parts. I'd prefer not to spend my time selling spring bars and you guys would probably prefer not to have to pay extra for them.

But let me know if more of you are interested and I will do some more research.



Rob T said:


> O.K. but couldn't the spring bar holes still be drilled through the lugs? So that sholderless spring bars can be used with other bands - such as the Bond NATO?
> 
> Seems like that would allow for both sholderless Rolex style spring bars, and regular spring bars (best of both worlds).
> 
> Rob.


----------



## obie

I think using standard spring bars is the smart way to go. While you may be able to have custom made ones, at some time they become more hassle that it is worth.


----------



## Rob T

Yao said:


> Yes the spring bar holes will be drilled through no matter what.
> 
> The one drawback that I can see with making the lugs compatible with both a shoulderless and double flange style spring bar is that you will need to custom make the spring bars. Usually the shoulderless off the shelf spring bars that will fit into standard double flange holes are so flimsy I don't see the point. To make the shoulderless spring bar hefty enough to mean something will mean that the double flange spring bar will have to have a larger diameter. Ideally the custom made spring bars would be ready in advance of case sampling so that we can ensure that all the parts fit when the time comes.
> 
> I usualy shy away from custom spring bars because you end up beholdened to the mfg for the parts. I'd prefer not to spend my time selling spring bars and you guys would probably prefer not to have to pay extra for them.
> 
> But let me know if more of you are interested and I will do some more research.


Thanks Bill - that's good news!

On the sholderless bars, it sounds like the issue with the SAR was getting the spring bars to "pop in" to the drilled holes in the lugs when installing them. Now the solid end links on watches that use double sholdered or flange spring bars typically have an opening where the end link and lug meet so that you can get a spring bar tool in there to compress the spring bar. It seems to me it might be possible to do the same thing when using sholderless springbars, and just use a slightly shorter spring bar (you can get the Rolex style in 19mm or even 18mm). When installing them, you could use the opening in the solid end link to guide the sholderless springbars into place with a bracelet tool. And of course to remove them, just use the holes from the other side (so no need for a step or flange on the spring bar). Does that sound like something that might work?

Rob.


----------



## tallguy

I liked the SAR springbars so much I used them on my MMT Blackwaterb-)


----------



## Galpo

+1 on the standard spring bars.
IMHO there is no need to complicate what needs no complication. 
If "Q" had to make this decision, he would go for the standard
and investing effort in more important areas.

I wish sometimes that Q had the same logical sense as Mr. Yao


----------



## Dr. Robert

Push comes to shove.....the bracelet that's on my Vantage would be fine.:-!


----------



## Dave E

Waiting for a used Vantage to arrive here any day now, but everything I've seen suggests that the bracelet from that would be fine if necessary.


----------



## Tetraflop

Riveted style bracelet, please!

_____________
Dietmar


----------



## Reintitan

*I want a bracelet for sure >>>*

A riveted-style would be preferred, but would it be possible to also have the watch delivered without the bracelet attached? I'm planning on wearing my Kingston most of the time on a G-10/NATO/Bond strap. I would switch to the bracelet during "more formal" occasions.


----------



## GregoryD

I think tapering to 18mm would look better than 16mm, which would probably be too narrow.


----------



## Donald Grant

Yep, I want riveted.

DG


----------



## siggy

Yao said:


> Yes the spring bar holes will be drilled through no matter what.
> 
> The one drawback that I can see with making the lugs compatible with both a shoulderless and double flange style spring bar is that you will need to custom make the spring bars. Usually the shoulderless off the shelf spring bars that will fit into standard double flange holes are so flimsy I don't see the point. To make the shoulderless spring bar hefty enough to mean something will mean that the double flange spring bar will have to have a larger diameter. Ideally the custom made spring bars would be ready in advance of case sampling so that we can ensure that all the parts fit when the time comes.
> 
> I usualy shy away from custom spring bars because you end up beholdened to the mfg for the parts. I'd prefer not to spend my time selling spring bars and you guys would probably prefer not to have to pay extra for them.
> 
> But let me know if more of you are interested and I will do some more research.


Bill,

You have obviously thought this matter through and though some people would like shoulderless bars I don't see an overwhelming desire for them by all buyers judging by the posts.

May I just ask that you position the hole in the lug in such a way that it allows eventual buyers to drill out the holes enlarging them slightly so that standard of the shelf shoulderless bars will fit if they wish to make this modification.

I have done this procedure before on another watch myself and it is not that difficult. The small hole for the normal spring bars serve a guide hole and it's really easy, I even got away with using a hand held drill, the guide holes keep it straight. This way if it goes wrong it's all the buyer's fault :-d

regards

siggy


----------



## JDS (Ohio)

Did my vote. But what about an UN-tapered bracelet? Or would that spoil the look of it? I had a straight bracelet with no taper originally on my SMP300, and it was very comfortable.

However, if the bracelet does taper, keep it at no more than 2mm drop. I can live 18mm at the clasp, but I've already found that taper to 16mm becomes less than comfortable.

I like the look of the riveted bracelet, but it would *NOT*  tick me off if it was standard.

And no custom spring bars, that could be a nightmare down the road to replace.


----------



## tadman

If we're discussing a watch Bond would want to wear rather than a dupe of his 1963 watch, I'd think he would want the protection of a fliplock and the quality of newer solid links. 

Obviously the counter to my argument is that Bond would want the most advanced diver out there, which is something like a Sinn UX or who knows....

Carry on with the good work, Mr. Yao. I had a monster with your parts on it and really enjoyed the plongeur hands.


----------



## Steve356

Are the Marathon SAR spring bars readily available? those have pretty long sturdy ends and are thinner than Rolex-style ones. same thickness of the ends as the regular 1.8mm spring bars. I think it would be nice to include a set of those for those who want to wear the watch on a leather band or NATO. How about it?


----------



## Yao

Tallguy's comment has me intrigued as well. If the SAR spring bars really do fit the standard holes then we can continue with the project with standard spring bars and figure out the shoulderless spring bars later. I have a couple of ideas where I can get those bars made or who actually made them.



Steve356 said:


> Are the Marathon SAR spring bars readily available? those have pretty long sturdy ends and are thinner than Rolex-style ones. same thickness of the ends as the regular 1.8mm spring bars. I think it would be nice to include a set of those for those who want to wear the watch on a leather band or NATO. How about it?


----------



## Steve356

Yao said:


> Tallguy's comment has me intrigued as well. If the SAR spring bars really do fit the standard holes


they definitely do. I have a set of those bars that I use on other watches. it fits just fine. regular 1.8mm thick bars also fit the SAR endlinks just fine.


----------



## Steve356

I know that most people voted for Solid endlinks, but I'd like to point out that using single shoulder bars with regular hollow endlinks would be extremely sturdy like on the vintage Rolex Submariners and would also cut down on manufacturing costs(!) as the tolerances would not have to be so tight.


----------



## siggy

Steve356 said:


> they definitely do. I have a set of those bars that I use on other watches. it fits just fine. regular 1.8mm thick bars also fit the SAR endlinks just fine.


That's great Steve,

I think you and Tallguy have come up with a great solution :-!

regards

siggy


----------



## Yao

Okay. I have ordered a few sets to use as reference. I lost my original set for my GSAR so its also a good excuse to get the original pins again 



siggy said:


> That's great Steve,
> 
> I think you and Tallguy have come up with a great solution :-!
> 
> regards
> 
> siggy


----------



## giosdad

I would prefer that it tapers to 18mm and not 16mm as IMO that would seem too thin and throw off the balance of the case.


----------



## Rob T

siggy said:


> Bill,
> 
> You have obviously thought this matter through and though some people would like shoulderless bars I don't see an overwhelming desire for them by all buyers judging by the posts.
> 
> May I just ask that you position the hole in the lug in such a way that it allows eventual buyers to drill out the holes enlarging them slightly so that standard of the shelf shoulderless bars will fit if they wish to make this modification.
> 
> I have done this procedure before on another watch myself and it is not that difficult. The small hole for the normal spring bars serve a guide hole and it's really easy, I even got away with using a hand held drill, the guide holes keep it straight. This way if it goes wrong it's all the buyer's fault :-d
> 
> regards
> 
> siggy


Or could the holes be oversized slightly to begin with? A smaller springbar will always fit a larger hole.

Rob.


----------



## Rob T

Another vote for riveted - and 16mm taper per the original too. This is not too narrow and looks quite eligant without being delicate.

Rob.


----------



## Yao

Sorry but that would be a bad idea. The bracelet and case mfg won't like that in the least if we are using solid-end links, which it appears that we are.



Rob T said:


> Or could the holes be oversized slightly to begin with? A smaller springbar will always fit a larger hole.
> 
> Rob.


----------



## Dave E

I'd like to echo the calls for a taper to 18mm not 16mm. I know we're going for the look of the original overall, but there's no need to absolutely duplicate everything!


----------



## Farrell

I'd want a tapered bracelet on this. A parallel wouldn't look right.


----------



## sschum

Tapered, yes, but only to 18mm (please ;-))

Scott


----------



## racerx454

*+1 Rolex shoulderless springbar*

I greatly prefer the shoulderless design. I think it is stronger, easier to change and renders the strap/bracelet changing process less likely to result in scratches. I have no issue paying more for that option.

I am excited to hear more about the rivet bracelet.

-Kevin-


----------



## Yao

*Bracelet....*

the drawings are being revised at the moment. I hope to have something you guys can comment on late next week. I will try to design the watch to be compatible with the SAR spring bars. I think that that is the most likely and economical solution.


----------



## JDS (Ohio)

JDS (Ohio) said:


> .......I like the look of the riveted bracelet, but it would tick me off if it was standard.


I actually meant to say that while I really liked the look of the riveted style, it would *NOT* tick me off if the bracelet was a standard Oyster style. To anyone misled by my crappy typing and lack of proofreading, my apologies. Mea culpa.


----------



## siggy

I'm very interested to see Bill's plans for the riveted bracelet, could be a major plus if he goes ahead with it.

regards

siggy


----------



## Yao

*Okay relieved that...*

that was a typo 



JDS (Ohio) said:


> I actually meant to say that while I really liked the look of the riveted style, it would *NOT* tick me off if the bracelet was a standard Oyster style. To anyone misled by my crappy typing and lack of proofreading, my apologies. Mea culpa.


----------



## JDS (Ohio)

*Re: Okay relieved that...*

Story of my life Bill, one big typo!:roll:


----------



## Yao

*I will post an update with drawings...*

of the bracelet as it currently stands tomorrow.


----------



## J.B. Books

giosdad said:


> i would prefer that it tapers to 18mm and not 16mm as imo that would seem too thin and throw off the balance of the case.


+1


----------



## JDS (Ohio)

Ditto for me; I already had a 19mm to16mm taper on a watch once and had to replace it - just not comfortable. Keep the taper to 2mm (or less).


----------



## k7lro

*Re: I will post an update with drawings...*



Yao said:


> of the bracelet as it currently stands tomorrow.


Is it tomorrow yet?









Hiya Bill.


----------



## Yao

*Here is the current draft of the bracelet...*










The one thing on the bracelet at this point that I am going to ask to see if the mfg can change is the non-functional pins that hold the links together. As you will notice all of the screw heads on the side of the bracelet are slotted for a screw driver. However, unless I am reading the complete drawing incorrectly, only 3 of the pins on each side actually function as actual screws. The other screw heads are actually just studs that snap into place. I will see if the mfg can make the decorative studs/pins without the slots unless you guys feel differently and like all of the "screw" heads with slots.

I wanted to post this sooner rather than later so I could incorporate additional feedback to the mfg rather than run them around in circles too often. Let me know what you think.... :think:

P.S. the logo on the clasp isn't centered. I didn't bug them about it yet


----------



## -thorsten-

*Re: Here is the current draft of the bracelet...*

I'd say slotless pins.


----------



## timbo

*Re: Here is the current draft of the bracelet...*

Yeah, I'd say drop the non-functional slots as well. Kudos for going the extra mile and getting this bracelet included.


----------



## boddah

Looks great Bill b-)

I'd also say drop the non-functional slots.


----------



## Steve356

I like it with the screw slots. Gives it a nice tool-like look. if not done, then all those round polished heads might make for a much too blingy look IMHO.


----------



## siggy

Bill,

How are the decorative studs/pins held in place, ie. what are the chances of them falling off?

My first thought is to choose slotless so it looks like the original.

regards

siggy


----------



## giosdad

Slotless, the original I have seen did not have slots.

I too am concerned on how the pins are hled in place.


----------



## Donald Grant

Only the pins that really adjust, should have slots. The rest of the pin heads should be rounded over without screw slots.

DG


----------



## JDS (Ohio)

Donald Grant said:


> Only the pins that really adjust, should have slots. The rest of the pin heads should be rounded over without screw slots.
> 
> DG


Ditto. I can picture me or a watchmaker getting frantic trying to unscrew something that isn't actually threaded, maybe thinking we've stripped the threads.


----------



## NWP627

Donald Grant said:


> Only the pins that really adjust, should have slots. The rest of the pin heads should be rounded over without screw slots.
> 
> DG


I agree as well.
N


----------



## cpotters

Never a fan of "faux" anything. Screws should look like screws, caps like caps. If there is a non-functional screw on that band, I WILL try to remove it someday, and ruin it.


----------



## GregoryD

Donald Grant said:


> Only the pins that really adjust, should have slots. The rest of the pin heads should be rounded over without screw slots.
> 
> DG


Totally agree. This being a tool watch, a screw should look like a screw, and a pin head should look like a pin head. I think I would rather have a Vantage-style bracelet with functional screws rather than riveted-style bracelet with faux screw/pin heads, if that's what it comes to. Hopefully we'll be able to get a riveted-style bracelet with "fully functional" parts.

Greg


----------



## Yao

*I don't think that will be an issue...*

the pins look to me as if they will be snapped together, so essentially they are built never to come apart. I will ask though but don't think it will be an issue as these guys make bracelets for a lot of top names.

I will also ask how the side pieces of each link will be held in place.



siggy said:


> Bill,
> 
> How are the decorative studs/pins held in place, ie. what are the chances of them falling off?
> 
> My first thought is to choose slotless so it looks like the original.
> 
> regards
> 
> siggy


----------



## Reintitan

*Re: I don't think that will be an issue...*

No non-functional slots please. Also, if only 3 of the slots are actual screws, is that enough flexibility to size the bracelet for every size wrist?


----------



## siggy

*Re: I don't think that will be an issue...*



Yao said:


> the pins look to me as if they will be snapped together, so essentially they are built never to come apart. I will ask though but don't think it will be an issue as these guys make bracelets for a lot of top names.


Thanks Bill.

What started me think about that was the idea of *maybe *( not a strong opinion ) that the real screw heads could be made flush with the sides like a normal bracelet. I thought the slots in the screws might catch on sleeves etc, whereas if the decorative ones were rounded they would not catch on things. Difficult to know judge from a drawing without holding the real thing in your hand whether those slots might snag things, it could be a non-issue.

How badly does it affect the symmetry of the bracelet if those 3 reals screws were made flush?

regards

siggy


----------



## Galpo

*Re: I don't think that will be an issue...*



siggy said:


> Thanks Bill.
> 
> What started me think about that was the idea of *maybe *( not a strong opinion ) that the real screw heads could be made flush with the sides like a normal bracelet. I thought the slots in the screws might catch on sleeves etc, whereas if the decorative ones were rounded they would not catch on things. Difficult to know judge from a drawing without holding the real thing in your hand whether those slots might snag things, it could be a non-issue.
> 
> How badly does it affect the symmetry of the bracelet if those 3 reals screws were made flush?
> 
> regards
> 
> siggy


I think that a screw head should be only when it is attached to a 
real screw, like the opinion of most people here.
I have a bracelet with a similar design, and to try and answer Siggy's question, I've never had a problem with sleeves and so.
My bracelet is asian made, not bad but far from top quality,
it looks ok with no issues so far.


----------



## siggy

*Re: I don't think that will be an issue...*



Galpo said:


> I think that a screw head should be only when it is attached to a
> real screw, like the opinion of most people here.
> I have a bracelet with a similar design, and to try and answer Siggy's question, I've never had a problem with sleeves and so.
> My bracelet is asian made, not bad but far from top quality,
> it looks ok with no issues so far.


Sounds good, not an issue then.

regards

siggy


----------



## Galpo

*Re: I don't think that will be an issue...*



siggy said:


> Sounds good, not an issue then.
> 
> regards
> 
> siggy


I hope I'm right :roll:
Here is a pic I have (try to ignore the hair content)


----------



## Rob T

*Re: Here is the current draft of the bracelet...*

Bracelet looks good. An alternative to the slotted pins for the removable links might be recessed hex head screws (use a small allen key to remove). Would blend better with the fixed rivet pins.

Rob.


----------



## tallguy

Wow...I really didn't have hopes that we would end up with a riveted-style bracelet....way cool!:-!:-!:-! (+1 for dumping the "faux" screwheads!)


----------



## MatKid152

What's the benefit of riveted vs non? Is it just asthetics or is their a functional improvement? Simply on appearance I think it looks better.


----------



## Yao

*I am seeing if they can add more....*

fine adjustment to the clasp cover. But the longer links dictated by the original design essentially limit the number of removable links to 3 from the 4 say on the Vantage bracelet. The shorter links of say the Vantage bracelet didn't look good in this riveted style.



Reintitan said:


> No non-functional slots please. Also, if only 3 of the slots are actual screws, is that enough flexibility to size the bracelet for every size wrist?


----------



## Yao

*Just a matter of aesthetics...*

I am sure that those rivets were more functional in the past. But now its just more a matter of offerings something different and relevant to the project.



MatKid152 said:


> What's the benefit of riveted vs non? Is it just asthetics or is their a functional improvement? Simply on appearance I think it looks better.


----------



## Yao

*Yes it probably will adversely affect the symmetry*

since the functional screws are spaced out over three links.



siggy said:


> Thanks Bill.
> 
> What started me think about that was the idea of *maybe *( not a strong opinion ) that the real screw heads could be made flush with the sides like a normal bracelet. I thought the slots in the screws might catch on sleeves etc, whereas if the decorative ones were rounded they would not catch on things. Difficult to know judge from a drawing without holding the real thing in your hand whether those slots might snag things, it could be a non-issue.
> 
> How badly does it affect the symmetry of the bracelet if those 3 reals screws were made flush?
> 
> regards
> 
> siggy


----------



## Farrell

*Re: I am seeing if they can add more....*

This looks good. I like.


----------



## Billy

*Re: Here is the current draft of the bracelet...*










Hiya' Bill - what are the group of parallel lines on the clasp ? Decoration or function of some type - or not indicative of anything that will be on the final product ? TIA.

Kind Regards,

Billy


----------



## Yao

*The parallel lines*

are to indicate the presence of satin finishing and the direction of the finish.



Billy said:


> Hiya' Bill - what are the group of parallel lines on the clasp ? Decoration or function of some type - or not indicative of anything that will be on the final product ? TIA.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> Billy


----------



## Billy

*Re: The parallel lines*

Ahh - sorry for my confusion ! I much appreciate the clarification = bracelet looks terrific (as do all your choices for this project).

Best Regards,

Billy


----------



## Steve356

Is the transition from 20mm wide links to 18mm wide ones too harsh? I notice the transitioning links are straight. What if they were made at an angle? Wouldn't that look better?


----------



## GraniteQuarry

Steve356 said:


> Is the transition from 20mm wide links to 18mm wide ones too harsh? I notice the transitioning links are straight. What if they were made at an angle? Wouldn't that look better?


Well spotted !! Should be a gradual angle on the last few links no ?? ;-)

Oh, and slotless rivets for the bulk of the bracelet please, as has been suggested.


----------



## GregoryD

Steve356 said:


> Is the transition from 20mm wide links to 18mm wide ones too harsh? I notice the transitioning links are straight. What if they were made at an angle? Wouldn't that look better?


I also noticed that the transition from 20mm to 18mm was more noticeable than on a bracelet with angled links. I'm thinking that maybe it would be impossible to do rivets on an angled link, because the rivet head would cant forward slightly due to the angle. A screw can be slightly recessed, so that even though the screw head doesn't flush with the angled outter edge of the link, you don't notice it, but not so witha rivet head. I think that makes sense...?

Greg


----------



## tallguy

GraniteQuarry said:


> Well spotted !! Should be a gradual angle on the last few links no ?? ;-)
> 
> Oh, and slotless rivets for the bulk of the bracelet please, as has been suggested.


o|o|o|o|o|o|:-x:-x:-x:-x:-x:roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:


----------



## Yao

*Actually the original Rolex riveted bracelet....*

has a stepped taper as illustrated in the technical drawing.


----------



## Steve356

GregoryD said:


> I'm thinking that maybe it would be impossible to do rivets on an angled link, because the rivet head would cant forward slightly due to the angle. A screw can be slightly recessed, so that even though the screw head doesn't flush with the angled outter edge of the link, you don't notice it, but not so witha rivet head. I think that makes sense...?
> 
> Greg


ahh, yes. you are probably right. the rivet is probably a head of a steel rod that goes all the way through the link. it would probably be complicated to make it sit at an angle.


----------



## tallguy

*Re: Actually the original Rolex riveted bracelet....*



Yao said:


> has a stepped taper as illustrated in the technical drawing.


 :-!|>:-!|>:-!|>b-)


----------



## Farrell

*Re: Actually the original Rolex riveted bracelet....*

With Bill on this one - I noticed the links were straight (little surprised anyone didn't) and assumed it was as per original - like it. Bit different to the other oyster bracelets out there.


----------



## JDS (Ohio)

*Re: Actually the original Rolex riveted bracelet....*

I'm for pulling the trigger. Not that I'm axious or anything... Sounds like you did your homework, not that any of us will be likely to even notice a 0.5mm step per link (on each side).


----------



## colinman.77

Bill
Are the rivets on the bracelet functional? Do they hold the links together, or are they purely cosmetic.


----------



## Yao

*Actually they do hold the bracelet...*

together. Those pieces on the sides are held on my the extra pins.



colinman.77 said:


> Bill
> Are the rivets on the bracelet functional? Do they hold the links together, or are they purely cosmetic.


----------



## ScottH

*Somehow I spaced commenting on the bracelet...*

So here goes... I'm really pleased with the look so far. I have a vintage Rolex 1501 with the original riveted bracelet and even though it's narrower the tapered steps look like Bill's rendering. I definitely want the rivets to be smooth-headed like the originals except for the removable links but it looks like that has already been addressed. FWIW the bracelet I have has been replaced once and repaired by Rolex a few times since the watch was new. Hopefully this modern version will be more durable. Finally, even though I chose solid end links in the poll I would be totally happy with the bent/stamped type if needed to fit the springbars.


----------



## Yao

*I think we have addressed the...*

Rolex-style spring bar issue by substituting Marathon SAR spring bars for the Rolex-style. They aren't as beefy as the original but they will do the job very well. Also using these bars will enable us to keep the solid-end-link feature as well.

]


ScottH said:


> So here goes... I'm really pleased with the look so far. I have a vintage Rolex 1501 with the original riveted bracelet and even though it's narrower the tapered steps look like Bill's rendering. I definitely want the rivets to be smooth-headed like the originals except for the removable links but it looks like that has already been addressed. FWIW the bracelet I have has been replaced once and repaired by Rolex a few times since the watch was new. Hopefully this modern version will be more durable. Finally, even though I chose solid end links in the poll I would be totally happy with the bent/stamped type if needed to fit the springbars.


----------



## manitoujoe

*Re: I think we have addressed the...*

Love the bracelet! And SAR spring bars makes the world MUCH less complicated. Sweet!

Loving this. Thanks!
Mark


----------



## dave43

*Re: I think we have addressed the...*

Any idea if the final bracelet will fit the vantage?


----------



## kojo

RE SPRINGBARS.. i'm one of those guys who constantly change the straps on my watches. It's like giving your watch a facelift or like your girlfriend getting a new hairdo. If the springbars are difficult to remove, it makes changing the straps difficult. I don't want to have to saw my springbars in order to take off a nato and replace it with steel..


----------



## Yao

*I should clarify those "special"*

spring bars will be included "on the side". The watch will ship on standard spring bars for the bracelet. The shoulderless spring bars will hinder the fit of the bracelet.



kojo said:


> RE SPRINGBARS.. i'm one of those guys who constantly change the straps on my watches. It's like giving your watch a facelift or like your girlfriend getting a new hairdo. If the springbars are difficult to remove, it makes changing the straps difficult. I don't want to have to saw my springbars in order to take off a nato and replace it with steel..


----------



## dave43

*Re: I should clarify those "special"*

Sorry for the noob question but how do you take off the shoulderless spring bars linked without any notch?


----------



## giosdad

*Re: I should clarify those "special"*



dave43 said:


> Sorry for the noob question but how do you take off the shoulderless spring bars linked without any notch?


Here is a post from Bill referring to drilled lugs. That means you can push through from the outside of the lug and remove the spring bar. I do not think any of the mock-ups show the drilled lugs.



Yao said:


> Yes the spring bar holes will be drilled through no matter what.
> 
> The one drawback that I can see with making the lugs compatible with both a shoulderless and double flange style spring bar is that you will need to custom make the spring bars. Usually the shoulderless off the shelf spring bars that will fit into standard double flange holes are so flimsy I don't see the point. To make the shoulderless spring bar hefty enough to mean something will mean that the double flange spring bar will have to have a larger diameter. Ideally the custom made spring bars would be ready in advance of case sampling so that we can ensure that all the parts fit when the time comes.
> 
> I usualy shy away from custom spring bars because you end up beholdened to the mfg for the parts. I'd prefer not to spend my time selling spring bars and you guys would probably prefer not to have to pay extra for them.
> 
> But let me know if more of you are interested and I will do some more research.


----------



## Yao

*The lugs have to be drilled through...*

and you use a spring bar tool or a paper clip.



dave43 said:


> Sorry for the noob question but how do you take off the shoulderless spring bars linked without any notch?


----------



## Cowbiker

Just went through this thread, post getting on the pre-order, and I am thrilled to see the enthusiasm towards period appropriate details in this project makes me all the more glad to be picking one up.

I expected similar towards the TR-900, shocked the majority wanted a depth rating on the dial of that, but will pick one up just the same.


----------



## 7ranquilcitizen

I too am curious if this bracelet would fit a vantage.


----------



## TheDude

7ranquilcitizen said:


> I too am curious if this bracelet would fit a vantage.


Ooooh. That would be awesome. I could use the spare bracelet on the Vantage if it fits!

Bill, if it doesn't fit, a Vantage-compatible set of end links with the Kingston bracelet would make for a nice upsell for the Vantage. I'm sure a lot of folks would welcome a period-accurate riveted bracelet on their Vantage.


----------

