# Honest Opinion - Key West vs Rolex



## Ipromise (Jan 14, 2013)

So, honest question here... Though I've not handled one, I've heard nothing but praise about MK watches and their quality. Does anyone (so far) with a Key West feel any pangs of regret for not saving up for a Rolex instead? I'm constantly on the fence on whether to go for one of these (I understand the wait ahead) or to just save for the original daddy-o. Part of me is bothered by going for an homage, but then again, I think "why?". 

Anyone else in this boat?


----------



## Plat0 (Feb 28, 2012)

I was in that boat. 

I wanted a SubC and I found my Kingston. Different watches but the Kingston is just so damn sweet that I actually forgot about that Sub. I might still get one some day...

I wanted an Explorer I and I found the Vantage. This one was easy. The Vantage is the clear winner. 

I want an Explorer II (polar dial) and I'm hoping for Fulcrum Capstone to fill that void. 

You know what the great thing is? All three watches still wouldn't afford just one of those Rolexes.


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

I think that if you are tempted to to ask the question, you would be better off saving for the Rolex unless it will always be cost prohibitive.


----------



## Thieuster (Jan 22, 2009)

It's all about value for money (and an established reputation). And, do you want a watch from a multinational company or from an artisan from Pennsylvania?

We all know that Rolex offers a lot. No need to sum them up here. And most people here love Rolex for their quality, looks and (... - fill in yourself why you want/own a Rolex). But, it comes at a price. When you take the step to vintage and sought after Rolex models, you know that you're not only paying for the watch, but also for the exclusivity and emotion of owning a vintage Rolex. And those 'emotions' are too expensive for most people!

Enter MKII. Bill offers more than simply a watch that looks like a vintage watch. MKIIs echo the look and feel of vintage Rolex watches combined with extraordinary details not found on other watches in the same price range. With the KW, Bill touches the quality of Tudor, the Rolex' more affordable brand. But where Rolex/Tudor has a solid reputation and a high end HQ in Switzerland, Bill is a one man band with a shop in Pennsylvania.









The Rolex HQ

The region near Bill's HQ


----------



## mlb212 (Sep 17, 2013)

Ipromise said:


> So, honest question here... Though I've not handled one, I've heard nothing but praise about MK watches and their quality. Does anyone (so far) with a Key West feel any pangs of regret for not saving up for a Rolex instead? I'm constantly on the fence on whether to go for one of these (I understand the wait ahead) or to just save for the original daddy-o. Part of me is bothered by going for an homage, but then again, I think "why?".
> 
> Anyone else in this boat?


I have both, Kingston and Sub. I prefer to wear my Kingston. Sub is a good watch but Kingston has this serious watch underground thing, these were built by hand in PA. Anybody with $7k can buy a rollie. If the whole rollie thing appeals to you, then save up for a rollie. I think I am at the point where I'd rather wear a MKII, DOXA, Squale, Jenny, Bremont, etc...


----------



## AlejandrOmega (Jul 5, 2010)

I can't comment on the key West, but I have had a mkii nassau, vantage, quad 10, as well as rolex subs, gmts, and others.

The case proportions and sizing on the rolex models fit me better. They are thinner and something about the lug to lug length fits me better. 

I found myself wearing the rolex models more often. I'm not a brand snob, for me I just found them to be a better design.

Note: none of my rolex' were modern. I find the case proportions on new rolex models to be unwieldy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

I don't understand these types of questions. Do you really think an homage is merely a placeholder until you can afford a real Rolex? What then, do you sell everything else and stop collecting?

There's room for vintages, modern, and homages in most collections (I know there are in mine). Each watch brings something unique to the table, or else I wouldn't have it. My moderns are solid, but they don't have the elegant lines of my vintages and homages. I tend to wear my homages more than the vintages because they are more solid (modern design, construction and materials) and are less expensive to repair/replace if lost or damaged.

If you're in this hobby just to chase "your Rolex" you're going to overlook some wonderful watches along the way.


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

Since this thread is useless without pictures...

Vintage and homage:









Modern and homage:









Homage:

















And finally, vintage:


----------



## Ruggs (Apr 1, 2016)

These mkII homages are gorgeous watches but they're too hard to get ahold of. I vote Rolex if you can afford it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Arthur (Feb 11, 2006)

I have been collecting watches for almost 50 years. I have had Rolex watches since my first Air King probably around 1966-67. Submariners, SeaDwellers, a couple of Day Dates and even a Paul Newman Daytona (purchased for 500 USD back in 1979). I was wearing Rolex watches, way before they became "cool". They were tool watches, outside of the DayDates, worn to work every day, scuba diving, around the farm and yard work. I still have several, the most contemporary model is a 16610 "P" serial with lugholes. 

My best comparison to the Key West would be my 16750 GMT. Both are great watches. Since receiving my Key West, none of my Rolexes have been out of the watch box, except for an occasional one day spin!

I believe that the only fair comparison is between the Key West and vintage Rolex. Between the two, I see very little difference in wearability, comfort and utility. What I do see is a big difference in what I would call "safe wearability". Certainly, the modern Key West holds all the advantages when it comes to water resistance, parts availability and cost to repair. I don't wear any of my older Rolex watches in conditions that might cause damage to the watch. Old acrylic crystals become brittle with age, cracks appear, usually where they can't be seen, seals and gaskets unless replaced on a regular basis may not be secure. Repairing old movements is becoming more problematic, as Rolex parts become harder to come by and more expensive. I was recently quoted a price of 375.00 USD to have a 1575 movement in a SeaDweller, cleaned, oiled and regulated, along with new seals and gasket. You could replace the 2893-2 movement in your Key West for two thirds of that!! 

So to me taking all of those factors in consideration, along with the fact that the Key West is a very well made, quality watch and darn good looking to boot, it's pretty much a no brainer for me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## cpotters (Jan 29, 2009)

I am a massive MkII fan. In fact, the only new watches I've ever bought among the many hundreds of watches I've owned over the years were MkII designs (I'm a long time collector of vintage).

However, there is nobody that can deny that a Rolex watch is a fine time piece, and one that you would and should be proud to own for the rest of your life.

If you want a watch, with name brand recognition, and a bulletproof reputation for quality… And you're planning on keeping it for 30 or 40 years, by all means buy the Rolex. However if you like the older designs and the smaller cases of yesteryear as I do, then most Rolexes of today just don't appeal regardless of their price. And that's where the MkII models come in. First rate quality, old-school philosophy.


----------



## Aceldama (Sep 7, 2013)

If you want a Rolex, save up for a Rolex. Nothing is really going to scratch that itch. My favorite watch is my birth year 5513. There really is no comparison.

I came to MKII looking for watches that didn't exist: An Explorer II with a rotating bezel (capstone) and a flat matte Explorer (always loved the dial, never loved the raised lume). 

After getting my hands on a few, nothing comes close at this price point and MKII gilt on the Kingston is better than any Rolex dial being made today IMHO. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mediocre (Oct 27, 2013)

IMHO, they may look very similar, but due to price they are built for different customers. 

But, then again, I could see an MKII as a great beater option, especially around water, for a Rolex owner that did not want to risk it


----------



## JFingers (Feb 18, 2012)

Someday I'll look to get a BLNR GMT II, but it won't be because I'm unhappy with my (multiple) MKIIs.


----------



## calwatchguy (Jun 23, 2015)

Agree with the question and the various responses. I've had my eye on the 16710 Rolex for a while. I forget who said it here, but anyone with $x thousand can find almost any Rolex. Vs try to find a desirable MKII. I've been looking for a paradive for a long time. I also personally think vintage Rolex prices have gotten crazy, and I prefer the older proportions of the rolexes vs the new ones. Having said all that, if they released a new coke gmt, I would buy it. And may pick up the batman if the price comes in. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## phillycheez (Mar 4, 2011)

If you've ever used a Rolex GMT movement... As far as functionality when traveling to multiple time zones... The Rolex GMT movement is far superior. 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk


----------



## timeturner7 (Aug 1, 2014)

Ipromise said:


> So, honest question here... Though I've not handled one, I've heard nothing but praise about MK watches and their quality. Does anyone (so far) with a Key West feel any pangs of regret for not saving up for a Rolex instead? I'm constantly on the fence on whether to go for one of these (I understand the wait ahead) or to just save for the original daddy-o. Part of me is bothered by going for an homage, but then again, I think "why?".
> 
> Anyone else in this boat?


I'm in the position of being fortunate enough to own multiple Rolexes before the Mkii Nassau I bought a couple of years ago. 
I find the whole experience of a Mkii much more involved in the 'watch world'. The forum discussions, waiting for the updates, the vintage (unachievable Rolex prices) designs in a modern case, waiting for the watch to be delivered knowing that Bill has gone over every detail. It is more special to me.

In terms of watch collecting, a vintage and modern Rolex are a must if you can ever afford them. Modern GMT ceramic, submariner, Daytona, Datejust.....all amazing watches. The bracelet and clasp on the sub far surpass any Mkii bracelet, but that is understandable at the price point.

But when I compare the Key West (haven't received mine yet) to a 16750 pepsi, the Key West has that amazing gilt dial, similar aluminium bezel, kind of similar bracelet with hollow end links (The Rolex one is better, but mine starts to fall off a bit as it is not double secured. Nassau vs the Submariner? Submariner is obviously a winner. But the Mkii I wear on all my work trips as it is more under the radar, I am more likely to change bracelets on a daily basis, and I get more compliments. I went to see a GS snowflake and the people working their asked to see my Nassau and I told them a little about the brand and they were amazed at the attention to detail on the case and dial and very satisfied turning the crown. They asked how much I paid and when I told them, they seemed very interested to look more into getting one. Would I have had the same experience with the sub? I don't think so.

This is part of the whole experience of watch collecting; being more involved in the whole process and meeting and discussing (online mostly for me) with people who have the same passion. Mkii collectors for me and the ones I could probably have a random 3 hours conversation on watches about. The average person with a subc I would not expect the same.

Honestly, the Key West was not just a watch I really wanted, but could justify me selling my Rolex GMT if I ever have to.

Looking at the Mkii line-up, I would grab a Hawkinge no-date, Nassau red triangle and Fulcrum grey bezel. This would cost me around $3.5k, and that is nowhere near subc territory, but you get three great designs in and fantastic build. If I had those three, I would be very satisfied and wouldn't regret the purchases if I was saving up for a subc. But having owned a Mkii and being involved in the forums a little with the whole story and wait, I would say that if I started with Mkii and bought a Rolex, I would def keep some of the Mkii's where possible. As I mentioned, I just see them as more of a special thing to own than just rocking up to the AD and buying a sub with immediate satisfaction (not that they aren't good watches, but it is just less involved).


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

For the price difference it had better be.

Besides, how many GMT owners are consistent world travelers? I would venture to say most are "desk travelers" and keep their second time zone set to either Zulu or opposite coast time.


----------



## STEELINOX (Mar 20, 2006)

Thieuster said:


> It's all about value for money (and an established reputation). And, do you want a watch from a multinational company or from an artisan from Pennsylvania?
> 
> We all know that Rolex offers a lot. No need to sum them up here. And most people here love Rolex for their quality, looks and (... - fill in yourself why you want/own a Rolex). But, it comes at a price. When you take the step to vintage and sought after Rolex models, you know that you're not only paying for the watch, but also for the exclusivity and emotion of owning a vintage Rolex. And those 'emotions' are too expensive for most people!
> 
> ...


I just have to add that the ROLEX of "today" doesn't present the value it did when their classic pieces were brought into the World.

Now the ROLEX brand has completely "sterilized" the oyster line, taking away classic lines such as "chamfered" mid casings with diagonally brushed lug tops, aluminum inserts, even lug holes, all gone the way of the dodo.

But it's how the brand has maintained its life. The ceramic inserts is what turned me away fro the brand, it's like a ROLEX became a "jewelry" piece. At any rate, they continue to slowly evolve and sell most everything they build and they do this very well...

Their timepieces are just not to my liking anymore. Which is why I am buying into MKII...

Thanks,
Randy

MK II White Knight AND Gilt Noire KEY WEST


----------



## phillycheez (Mar 4, 2011)

CMSgt Bo said:


> For the price difference it had better be.
> 
> Besides, how many GMT owners are consistent world travelers? I would venture to say most are "desk travelers" and keep their second time zone set to either Zulu or opposite coast time.


Jeez, it wasn't a knock on they key West. This is one of the touchiest sub forum.

I'm just stating what I view as the biggest difference. If you've ever used their movement, it's functionality is amazing. I miss how cool and convenient it was to set... It really spoils you. I personally can't buy a gmt watch unless it has those extra capabilities anymore cause I'll just always think I'm missing something.

Anyways, I actually use a paradive as my travel watch. It's perfect for what I do when I travel.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk


----------



## mtbmike (Sep 12, 2007)

CMSgt Bo thanks for these great pics. The best images of the white dial I have seen yet. Maybe my long wait is over mañana 



CMSgt Bo said:


> Since this thread is useless without pictures...
> View attachment 9037769
> 
> 
> View attachment 9037801


----------



## Aceldama (Sep 7, 2013)

STEELINOX said:


> I just have to add that the ROLEX of "today" doesn't present the value it did when their classic pieces were brought into the World.
> 
> Now the ROLEX brand has completely "sterilized" the oyster line, taking away classic lines such as "chamfered" mid casings with diagonally brushed lug tops, aluminum inserts, even lug holes, all gone the way of the dodo.
> 
> ...


Same here. The only Rolex watches I will ever own are the 4 and 5 digit models. Ceramic bezels, no lug holes, and PLC bracelets are just not my thing.


----------



## BigHaole (Jun 1, 2011)

All I can say is that they are very different watches. Personally, I'm not too thrilled with the current GMTMasterII. The black bezel does nothing for me. The "Batman" (Black/Blue) bezel intrigued me, but when I saw one on my wrist, I could tell that it would be a "fad" for me. I do like the 2-tone GMT-Master, but that's $12-ish thousand and scratches a very different itch, for a first ever gold (or part gold) watch that has a more formal look-and-feel. That itch will wait a bit longer.

Fun side note...I was at a Rolex AD, recently, and while trying to track down the elusive Ceramic Daytona, the sales guy complimented me on my classic GMTMaster. When I explained what a KeyWest was, he asked if he could look at it more closely and called over one of his associates. They both complimented me on how great it looked.


----------



## Arthur (Feb 11, 2006)

phillycheez said:


> Jeez, it wasn't a knock on they key West. This is one of the touchiest sub forum.
> 
> I'm just stating what I view as the biggest difference. If you've ever used their movement, it's functionality is amazing. I miss how cool and convenient it was to set... It really spoils you. I personally can't buy a gmt watch unless it has those extra capabilities anymore cause I'll just always think I'm missing something.
> 
> ...


I think that what he was saying wasn't a knock but simply at around 4-5 times the price, it should be something special. I agree with you that the functionality is really nice, especially if you travel across multiple time zones going in both directions. My only knock on any of the newer Rolex GMT's (16710 onward) is the loss of the quickset date function. If you wear the watch every day, or put it on a winder when not wearing, it's great, but like my old non quickset SeaDweller, if you pick up the watch to wear it today the 14th and it stopped on day 11, it's a real chore to wind it around and around to get the correct date. Otherwise I think they are great watches. And it's too bad Rolex doesn't produce a stainless version of the Pepsi GMT IIC.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## The Professional (Apr 29, 2010)

I would probably go with the Rolex. You'll probably want one eventually anyway.


----------



## BigHaole (Jun 1, 2011)

Arthur said:


> My only knock on any of the newer Rolex GMT's (16710 onward) is the loss of the quickset date function. If you wear the watch every day, or put it on a winder when not wearing, it's great, but like my old non quickset SeaDweller, if you pick up the watch to wear it today the 14th and it stopped on day 11, it's a real chore to wind it around and around to get the correct date.


I recently learned that you can use quick hour set backwards to change day, not only forward. So going from 14 to 11 is the same as going from 11 to 14. Which is to say, 72 clicks.


----------



## Chromejob (Jun 18, 2010)

Ipromise said:


> So, honest question here... Though I've not handled one, I've heard nothing but praise about MK watches and their quality. Does anyone (so far) with a Key West feel any pangs of regret for not saving up for a Rolex instead? I'm constantly on the fence on whether to go for one of these (I understand the wait ahead) or to just save for the original daddy-o. Part of me is bothered by going for an homage, but then again, I think "why?".
> 
> Anyone else in this boat?


If by "the original daddy-o" you mean a vintage Rolex of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s even (some of which can be had for rather reasonable prices, though like a complicated woman will require some special care and handling), then it's a fair argument. But if you new or pre-owned and serviced Rolex, then I believe most of those prices to be so inflated as to be absurd.

There are things you get with a superfine watch like a Rolex, Omega, Blancpain, et al, that you won't get with the product of a small bespoke watchmaker like Mk II, but then there are other qualities that the "small guy's" output possess that can outshine the mass-produced haute horologie watches. Beauty is not skin deep -- and this applies to both makes. (Rolex does remarkable R&D, and makes some of their own parts that others just buy off a parts market.)

Another thing to consider, which may (or MAY NOT!) be a concern for you. When you buy a watch from a bespoke maker, you're buying into a small, mostly devoted clientele of enthusiasts who appreciate the brand and quality. When you buy a widely available fashion and luxury item like a Rolex, you enter a club that ANYONE with the entry fee can join. A story I heard from a British Rolex collector, he complimented a fellow at a pub on his "Explorer," and man wheeled around, indignant, and proclaimed, "No, it's a Rolex!" (sigh) If you don't care that Rolexes are essentially widely available and "common" and worn by any number of classes of people, some you'd like to meet, and some you wouldn't, then by all means save up. If you'd rather associate with people who love the vintage models and enjoy wearing them, search for a vintage pre-owned model. If you'd rather join a community of people who appreciate the individual watchmaker and his devotion to classic design and craftsmanship, then you can -- for a lower entry fee -- buy into a group wearing one of these homages.

I know, I know. It's just a watch. ..._* Or is it...?*_ 

*Thank you, CMSgt, for your lovely photos. Great comparisons. *


----------



## BigHaole (Jun 1, 2011)

I was thinking about this question some more (which shows you how good a question it really is). For me, the KeyWest fills a nitch that is not currently filled by Rolex, both due to the classic style and due to the colors and materials. If there were a modern Stainless Steel GMTMasterII, with Red/Blue or Red/Black bezel, things would be different. But there isn't. The Red/Blue that is available is white gold, shockingly expensive, and the colors just seem wrong. Having tried one on at an AD, I could honestly say that I didn't like it on my wrist (oh the look the AD gave me for that comment). I'm sure it has to do with process of producing the two tone ceramic, but I just don't like how the colors looked...and I'm not paying $45k for a watch. If Rolex offered a better Red/Blue or Red/Black, on steel, at around the price of the Blue/Black GMTMasterII, would I want that over my KeyWest. There is a good chance my answer is "yes."

But then I thought some more (see, great question!). When I first signed up for this project, many years ago, what was I thinking? And back then, I was convinced I wanted the white dial "manager's watch". And that is something that just didn't exist in the Rolex lineup. And even if they were to offer one, today, it really wouldn't be the same thing, what with the maxi case and ceramic bezel. Plus...I don't see them offering a steel, white dial GMTMasterII. Rolex just doesn't make those kinds of moves. So if I think back to 4 years ago BigHaole, he would have said that there was no Rolex that he would consider over the KeyWest.

So why does modern BigHaole have a black dial, when 4-years-ago BigHaole was buying in for the white dial? Seeing that gilt against black was just more than I could resist. And seeing the green against white just didn't sing to me as I thought it would.


----------



## Aceldama (Sep 7, 2013)

CMSgt Bo said:


> For the price difference it had better be.
> 
> Besides, how many GMT owners are consistent world travelers? I would venture to say most are "desk travelers" and keep their second time zone set to either Zulu or opposite coast time.


I used to travel internationally quite a bit (1 week a month) to the Netherlands and Taipei. I STILL use my GMT function all the time to know the time for my teams (Ireland in the morning, Maryland in the afternoon, Singapore in the evening). Easier than checking my phone or computer when I'm out and about.


----------



## d88 (Nov 22, 2010)

I'm in the fortunate position of owning a Rolex Sub ND a Kingston and currently waiting on a Key West . My Kingston gets more wrist time, although to be fair that's probably in part due to the gilt dial on the Kingston and also I want to limit the chance of getting any dings/scratches on my Rolex. 

In answer to the OP's question, I don't regret buying either. They are probably the two watches I'd not sell and there are enough differences and subtle nuances between the two for me to enjoy wearing both.


----------



## longstride (Jan 13, 2011)

Having owned a Rolex GMT and an ETA GMT - one point to make would be the ease of changing time with the Rolex as the hour hand is independently settable from the GMT hand. I liked that it was possible to fly from LA to London and without having to stop the watch I could advance the hour hand 9 hours and that was it - time was set in a snap. The ETA GMT movements demand a lot more fiddling and swearing to get them right as they don't feature the independantly settable hour hand.

I think the MKII Keywest a is a very viable option when wanting to find a really high quality GMT Homage, the only other way to go might be to find a good Rolex 1675 and they seem to be selling in the 6-8K range.

An original Rolex GMT from the late 50's can easily sell from 60K and up. When I wore my Rolex as an everyday watch it was always produced a certain level of concern/consideration when I realized that I had 6K strapped to my wrist.

The Keywest is not really a competitor to a Rolex but you get almost the same visual/aesthetic bang for your buck without the paranoia.


----------



## Arthur (Feb 11, 2006)

longstride said:


> Having owned a Rolex GMT and an ETA GMT - one point to make would be the ease of changing time with the Rolex as the hour hand is independently settable from the GMT hand. I liked that it was possible to fly from LA to London and without having to stop the watch I could advance the hour hand 9 hours and that was it - time was set in a snap. The ETA GMT movements demand a lot more fiddling and swearing to get them right as they don't feature the independantly settable hour hand.
> 
> I think the MKII Keywest a is a very viable option when wanting to find a really high quality GMT Homage, the only other way to go might be to find a good Rolex 1675 and they seem to be selling in the 6-8K range.
> 
> ...


I agree with what you said above, but with one exception. Rolex 1675's, 16750's did not have a settable GMT function, they had a non settable "tracking" GMT hand. You have to use the rotating bezel for the second time zone function. The first settable function GMT was the GMT II 16710 which has the same settable forward and back hour hand as the current GMT IIC 116710 was the first.


----------



## longstride (Jan 13, 2011)

Arthur I was unaware of the fact that the hour hand on the pre GMT II's was not independently settable, so the GMT hand could be reset?



Arthur said:


> I agree with what you said above, but with one exception. Rolex 1675's, 16750's did not have a settable GMT function, they had a non settable "tracking" GMT hand. You have to use the rotating bezel for the second time zone function. The first settable function GMT was the GMT II 16710 which has the same settable forward and back hour hand as the current GMT IIC 116710 was the first.


----------



## Arthur (Feb 11, 2006)

longstride said:


> Arthur I was unaware of the fact that the hour hand on the pre GMT II's was not independently settable, so the GMT hand could be reset?


No, on all the GMT models before the 16710 GMT II, the 24 hour hand is not settable. The 24 hour hand moves around the dial every 24 hours. So at 12 midnight, all the hands are pointing to 12.










When you rotate the hour hand one complete revolution, and it is again pointing to 12 which would be 12 noon, the 24 hour hand is pointing to 6.










To set your second time zone, you rotate the bezel forward or backward to your second time zone. And example, it's midnight here in the central time zone (all hands pointing to 12), you are traveling to Amsterdam which is 7 hours ahead. You rotate the bezel counterclockwise to get the 7 dot on the bezeldirectly to 12. Now you read the second time off the bezel.










You are on your flight about halfway across the Atlantic, you glance at your watch, you see that it's now 4AM back at home, and it's now 11 AM in Amsterdam.








Actually works very well, all you need to know is the time at your destination or the time difference between where you are now and where you are going.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## longstride (Jan 13, 2011)

Nice! Thank you.



Arthur said:


> No, on all the GMT models before the 16710 GMT II, the 24 hour hand is not settable. The 24 hour hand moves around the dial every 24 hours. So at 12 midnight, all the hands are pointing to 12.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Chromejob (Jun 18, 2010)

Arthur said:


> ... You are on your flight about halfway across the Atlantic, you glance at your watch, you see that it's now 4AM back at home, and it's now 11 AM in Amsterdam....


Very nearly Beer O'clock. The brown tropic dial GMTs were ideal for that.....


----------



## BigHaole (Jun 1, 2011)

Chromejob said:


> Very nearly Beer O'clock. The brown tropic dial GMTs were ideal for that.....


The Tudor Bronze has a very "tropical" feel to it.


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

Arthur said:


> No, on all the GMT models before the 16710 GMT II, the 24 hour hand is not settable. The 24 hour hand moves around the dial every 24 hours. So at 12 midnight, all the hands are pointing to 12.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not to be pedantic, but the 16760 "fat lady" was the first GMT II and the first to have the "real" GMT movement. 3085 vs 3185 in the 16710 (the latter being thinner allowing the return to more traditional case dimensions).

http://www.gmtmasterhistory.com/gmt-master_ref_16760.html

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

BigHaole said:


> The Tudor Bronze has a very "tropical" feel to it.
> 
> View attachment 9142010


I like the Black Bays but I can't get past the snowflake hands on the regular dial.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## Arthur (Feb 11, 2006)

TheDude said:


> Not to be pedantic, but the 16760 "fat lady" was the first GMT II and the first to have the "real" GMT movement.
> 
> http://www.gmtmasterhistory.com/gmt-master_ref_16760.html
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


Sorry, I stand corrected. I forgot about the 16760. It was being produced along with the 16750 during the same years. I would guess that because of the limited numbers produced this is a pretty desirable model if in good condition.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

Arthur said:


> Sorry, I stand corrected. I forgot about the 16760. It was being produced along with the 16750 during the same years. I would guess that because of the limited numbers produced this is a pretty desirable model if in good condition.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Yeah, I've been searching for the "right one" for years. Was during a dark period when Rolex dials were garbage and degraded a lot.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## Arthur (Feb 11, 2006)

TheDude said:


> I like the Black Bays but I can't get past the snowflake hands on the regular dial.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


I agree, would be interesting to see how this one looks with either Mercedes hands or sword hands like the old 5517's/5513's.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## OmegaCosmicMan (Apr 1, 2011)

TheDude said:


> I like the Black Bays but I can't get past the snowflake hands on the regular dial.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


 I might be tempted past the will to resist if that Black Bay had some nice sword hands.... ;-)

:think: The 'snowflake' thing is a non-starter for me.... :-(


----------



## BigHaole (Jun 1, 2011)

TheDude said:


> I like the Black Bays but I can't get past the snowflake hands on the regular dial.


I've seen the classic Tudor snowflakes, with the snowflake hands (horrible name...not a snowflake!) and square indices. While I understand your appreciation for symetry, the square hour hand and round indices just doesn't bother me. How is it any more asymmetric than having triangles at 12:00 and sticks at 3-6-9 (or sticks at 6-9 and a date box at 3)? In the end, it's all what we get used to and I find the Black Bay dial and hands combination to be appealing, to me.

All that said, today is the Key West on it's Cincy Strap nato!


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

BigHaole said:


> I've seen the classic Tudor snowflakes, with the snowflake hands (horrible name...not a snowflake!) and square indices. While I understand your appreciation for symetry, the square hour hand and round indices just doesn't bother me. How is it any more asymmetric than having triangles at 12:00 and sticks at 3-6-9 (or sticks at 6-9 and a date box at 3)? In the end, it's all what we get used to and I find the Black Bay dial and hands combination to be appealing, to me.
> 
> All that said, today is the Key West on it's Cincy Strap nato!


Snowflakes are great. I just don't think the parts should be mixed. Snowflake dial and snowflake hands together, not mixed in with other stuff.

Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk


----------



## Plat0 (Feb 28, 2012)

This damn thread has me pining over Rolex again...

I really want that new Explorer I to keep forever.


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

Plat0 said:


> This damn thread has me pining over Rolex again...
> 
> I really want that new Explorer I to keep forever.


Yeah, the new dial and hands look great.

Some photos I found over on TRF. Not my watch.


----------



## poisonwazthecure (Sep 17, 2014)

I've been considering the new Explorer to hand down to my daughter. My son had called dibs on my speedmaster. He's 3. Lol.


----------



## Plat0 (Feb 28, 2012)

TheDude said:


> Yeah, the new dial and hands look great.
> 
> Some photos I found over on TRF. Not my watch.


Thanks for the pics...


It really is an amazing watch that I'll probably get myself soon enough. I'd still keep my Vantage though.


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

Plat0 said:


> Thanks for the pics...
> 
> 
> It really is an amazing watch that I'll probably get myself soon enough. I'd still keep my Vantage though.


Possibly for me also. We're spoiled by the Vantage's perfect hands, Rolex still didn't get the Mercedes hour hand quite right...


----------



## Neily_San (Nov 12, 2011)

Many have already given opinions on comparative cost versus perceived value. I have nothing further to add there. 

May I suggest there is another angle that doess not yet seem to have been covered in this thread. 

In my life I have lived in several places in the UK : Bournmouth; Exeter; Canterbury and Reading. All are large towns or small cities. All have something else in common. It is possible to walk off the street and buy a Rolex from an Authorised Dealer. 

Every day I work on a campus of approx 4000 professionals and I estimate I see 10 - 30 Rolex watches per day. 

I have never seen another MKII watch in public. Never ! 

Does anyone else like the exclusivity and somewhat alternative nature of a MKII ?

Neily


----------



## Chromejob (Jun 18, 2010)

What you describe is sort of like an off the shelf commodity. Like going into a car dealership, and making a deal on a car there on the lot. 

As opposed to ordering the car you want, with the options you want, made at the factory,... or going to a tailor to get a custom fitted suit,....  Bill assembles, tests, adjusts, sweats over each watch, then sends it TO YOU. There's a level of personal touch that ADs try to approximate with personalized service, but their product is still mass produced.


----------



## mlb212 (Sep 17, 2013)

Neily_San said:


> Many have already given opinions on comparative cost versus perceived value. I have nothing further to add there.
> 
> May I suggest there is another angle that doess not yet seem to have been covered in this thread.
> 
> ...


I also work with people who wear rollies, they always want to look at my Kingston. I look at their rollie as a curtesy but it looks like mine so... Only 300 people have a watch like my Kingston. If I ever run into another person with a Kingston it would likely cause some drinking and talking.


----------



## calwatchguy (Jun 23, 2015)

mlb212 said:


> I also work with people who wear rollies, they always want to look at my Kingston. I look at their rollie as a curtesy but it looks like mine so... Only 300 people have a watch like my Kingston. If I ever run into another person with a Kingston it would likely cause some drinking and talking.


Agreed. Rolexes are phenomenal watches, but there is something fun about micro watches that are not readily available to those who aren't WIS.

And in some cases, not readily available even if you do know about them lol.


----------



## Plat0 (Feb 28, 2012)

mlb212 said:


> If I ever run into another person with a Kingston it would likely cause some drinking and talking.


Amen!

We need a GTG on the left coast.


----------



## Neily_San (Nov 12, 2011)

calwatchguy said:


> Agreed. Rolexes are phenomenal watches, but there is something fun about micro watches that are not readily available to those who aren't WIS.
> 
> And in some cases, not readily available even if you do know about them lol.


If I recall correctly from the Wristwatch Annual ( will double check this evening ) Rolex production numbers are approx 850,000 per year !


----------



## OmegaCosmicMan (Apr 1, 2011)

:think: Rolex doesn't currently make anything that I would like..... Even though they may be advancing the watch world's cutting edge in some technologies, I don't need (or want) any new watch that has the brand engraved or stamped around the dial perimeter under the crystal. (Is that the 'rehaut'? Sounds 'French' to me...I'll have to look that up....)

I like drilled through lugs, and simple, uncluttered dials. Perfectly proportioned hands and dial markings.

And a watch that can be serviced for a reasonable amount. Because I am going to probably bump it, break it, drown it, or drop it, if I have it long enough. (Getting better in that respect, thankfully...)

I could afford to purchase Rolexes, or others, if I wanted to -- But I don't.

That white-dialed _Key West_? Nothing (and I mean *Nothing*) around is like it, or even comes close....

--- In terms of the Value or desireabilty of the features that have drawn me to it, there isn't anything that I know of.....

Add to that, the fact that a dedicated craftsman who has a similar eye and appreciation for details, (as my own) and that educates and informs my own opinions, with every new creation he has made available ...

:think: ---- Until Rolex has a 'craftsperson' like that, who communicates personally with customers, and that I can share ideas with, I'll be a Fan of Mr. Yao and MKII.

--- Just One MKII Fan's Opinion ---

|>|>


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

OmegaCosmicMan said:


> :think: Rolex doesn't currently make anything that I would like..... Even though they may be advancing the watch world's cutting edge in some technologies, I don't need (or want) any new watch that has the brand engraved or stamped around the dial perimeter under the crystal. (Is that the 'rehaut'? Sounds 'French' to me...I'll have to look that up....)
> 
> I like drilled through lugs, and simple, uncluttered dials. Perfectly proportioned hands and dial markings.
> 
> ...


Shrug. I love Rolex. A surgeon buddy of mine has a steady stream that rolls through his watch box. They're really something special. He just got a Smurf (look it up) and his daily driver is a James Cameron DeepSea. He also has had 3 different SkyDwellers (also amazing in the flesh). There's more than enough in their lineup over which to drool.

$600ish every 10 years for servicing really isn't too much to pay for a timepiece that will last (and continue appreciating) for generations. You're likely to pay 60-80% of that servicing any automatic (and most of what we talk about here has a low value relative to the service costs). I have one that's 43yrs old and another that's 32yrs old. Amazing timepieces.

If individuality is important, find a reference that was low volume like a fat lady or el diablo.


----------



## Aceldama (Sep 7, 2013)

Plat0 said:


> Amen!
> 
> We need a GTG on the left coast.


JFingers, thejollywatcher, and myself are threatening to have a GTG in the SF Bay Area as soon as a KW drops in our laps. I'll be bringing the hoard with me. Hoping my Blackwater is back by then.


----------



## calwatchguy (Jun 23, 2015)

Aceldama said:


> JFingers, thejollywatcher, and myself are threatening to have a GTG in the SF Bay Area as soon as a KW drops in our laps. I'll be bringing the hoard with me. Hoping my Blackwater is back by then.


Another Bay Area guy here. You all will get the KW's way before me (haven't even finalized the order yet, sigh). But I am down to meet up with some watch guys. It will save my wife from having to hear about stuff she really doesn't care about. Although she has started to wear my Seiko Cocktail time recently....hmmm could be trouble.

TheDude, I agree with your thoughts on Rolexes--they have some pretty awesome stuff. A buddy of mine and I went a couple months back to check out the Basel releases, and they are pretty cool (aside from the new AirKing in my humble opinion). What bums me out a bit is that from what I gather (I was in elementary school, so hard to opine), Rolexes 20-30 years were more affordable tool(ish) watches that were at least attainable relatively speaking (I've not done the inflation adjusting, so hard to really state that to be honest). Now a new rolex is half way to a Honda Civic. While something that is attainable for a lot of folks here, it's slightly harder to rationalize.

Further, in speaking with some active vintage rolex buyers, it seems like the prices have increased pretty dramatically over the past couple years on the models I like, most notably the 16710 (hence my interest in the KW). I will wait for the next economic downturn and see if the pricing calms down a bit on those as I would love to pick one of those up and maybe a no-date Sub with two lines of text (earlier 14060M). I also think it's beyond impressive what Rolex has done to shape watch preferences in the world in terms. Pretty crazy.

Back to the thread topic, I've handled a fair number of 16710's and owned a MKII LRRP GMT that I moved on in anticipation of getting the KW, but I will reserve any comparisons between the KW and an older Rolex until I get mine in the flesh. As others state, there isn't much comparison between the new Rolexes and the MKII, but the price points are also so different.


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

calwatchguy said:


> TheDude, I agree with your thoughts on Rolexes--they have some pretty awesome stuff. A buddy of mine and I went a couple months back to check out the Basel releases, and they are pretty cool (aside from the new AirKing in my humble opinion). What bums me out a bit is that from what I gather (I was in elementary school, so hard to opine), Rolexes 20-30 years were more affordable tool(ish) watches that were at least attainable relatively speaking (I've not done the inflation adjusting, so hard to really state that to be honest). Now a new rolex is half way to a Honda Civic. While something that is attainable for a lot of folks here, it's slightly harder to rationalize.
> 
> Further, in speaking with some active vintage rolex buyers, it seems like the prices have increased pretty dramatically over the past couple years on the models I like, most notably the 16710 (hence my interest in the KW). I will wait for the next economic downturn and see if the pricing calms down a bit on those as I would love to pick one of those up and maybe a no-date Sub with two lines of text (earlier 14060M). I also think it's beyond impressive what Rolex has done to shape watch preferences in the world in terms. Pretty crazy.


Except a Rolex purchase is smarter than pretty much any car purchase...

If you were watching in late 2008 to early 2009, the vintage market experienced a significant dip. Lots of stuff I'm sure people wish they had picked up. More mundane used stuff too. We'll see it happen again at some point.


----------



## calwatchguy (Jun 23, 2015)

TheDude said:


> Except a Rolex purchase is smarter than pretty much any car purchase...
> 
> If you were watching in late 2008 to early 2009, the vintage market experienced a significant dip. Lots of stuff I'm sure people wish they had picked up. More mundane used stuff too. We'll see it happen again at some point.


Most people need a car and not a Rolex, but strictly speaking your point is fair. I am hoping for a dip in older models if the economy slows down a bit. It seems like the prices have really run wild over the last 12-18 months on certain older Rolex models.


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

calwatchguy said:


> Most people need a car and not a Rolex, but strictly speaking your point is fair. I am hoping for a dip in older models if the economy slows down a bit. It seems like the prices have really run wild over the last 12-18 months on certain older Rolex models.


Naturally. The implication was not doing without a car, but buying less upmarket - leaving more $ for other things that retain more value (in this case watches). In general that's not a bad tactic with vehicles...

Yes, I have noticed the uptick on certain models. Kicking myself for not grabbing a snowflake a few years back when they were less than half what they're selling for now.


----------



## Plat0 (Feb 28, 2012)

I hope we see a dip in the older model market sooner than not. I really want to find a pristine explorer II white dial with a complete set.


----------



## OmegaCosmicMan (Apr 1, 2011)

Ipromise said:


> So, honest question here... Though I've not handled one, I've heard nothing but praise about MK watches and their quality. Does anyone (so far) with a Key West feel any pangs of regret for not saving up for a Rolex instead? I'm constantly on the fence on whether to go for one of these (I understand the wait ahead) or to just save for the original daddy-o. Part of me is bothered by going for an homage, but then again, I think "why?".
> 
> Anyone else in this boat?


I'm not....And here is Why.

 I pre-ordered as a Plank Holder, a white-dialed _*Key West*_, with a black and red bezel.

There is *No* Rolex like this (that is currently available).

So, that's that.

Homage? If You are 'put off' by an 'homage' .....

....Then don't buy one. :roll:

 That will be good, because it will mean that one more _*Key West*_ will be available for someone else.... :-!

The _Key West_ is a unique, virtually hand-built, individually assembled, and tested piece....

All done by a dedicated artisan and craftsman -- Someone, _who listens to what his clientele would desire in a watch_. :think:

As far as I know, with Rolex, you visit their store, and pick one out, if the store has one that you like.

Beyond that, You don't get to participate in the feature selection, technical selection, or any part of the design and 'idea' part of the process.

If you like one that they have, you pay the price and that's it.

If that is 'enough' or satisfactory for you, then, that's Great (for You) and Rolex.

If you want *more* than that....relatively simple, and uncomplicated transaction, well....

:think: It is available at MKII. 

It is a different appreciation, and a different interaction.

:think: To me, it is a much more rewarding and satisfactory transaction.

Perhaps, because, I am more involved at emotional and rational levels - I have more of a 'personal connection' with MKII.

And, I was able to offer suggestions and opinions about the features and design elements that I would like to see.

Does Rolex do that for You?

--- Best ---


----------



## Chromejob (Jun 18, 2010)

I haven't met Bill in person, yet,and look forward to it. I wear a Mk II most days that has been handled, inspected , and adjusted by the man, by hand. I'm wearing one right now. When I shake that man's hand, it will complete the circle.

Try experiencing that with a Rolex. I'll bet you can't.

___________

His watches are a little like his children. We're all caretakers of his children. He posted recently (Instagram) that he bumped into a Hawkinge customer in the street quite by accident. Imagine how that must feel.


__
http://instagr.am/p/BJnijgrglxS/


----------



## TheDude (Jan 27, 2009)

Chromejob said:


> I haven't met Bill in person, yet,and look forward to it. I wear a Mk II most days that has been handled, inspected , and adjusted by the man, by hand. I'm wearing one right now. When I shake that man's hand, it will complete the circle.
> 
> Try experiencing that with a Rolex. I'll bet you can't.
> 
> ...


Bob Ridley makes for a pretty great experience. I'd say that's pretty similar. I sat with him while he was tearing down my Red. Also had a half dozen hour long conversations with him regarding work he was doing on my watch. He's probably a lot more interesting than the guy assembling or QCing the Rolexes at the factory.

I saw one of the rarest reference Submariners in his workshop while I was there too.

http://jamesbondwatchesblog.com/201...onsor-display-of-ian-fleming-watch/#more-1839

Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk


----------



## Blueboost (Nov 6, 2008)

OmegaCosmicMan said:


> :think: Rolex doesn't currently make anything that I would like.....
> 
> That white-dialed _Key West_? Nothing (and I mean *Nothing*) around is like it, or even comes close....
> 
> ...


Somewhat flawed logic don't you think? I mean, you shun the brand that gave birth to the styles MIIK copies. I have nothing against MIIK, I appreciate any good watch, even some we don't talk about around here. I just think it's important that the original designer gets their well deserved credit. I look on MIIK's website and every watch except one or two are pure, undeniable Rolex. The Key West that nothing comes close to is one of them. That's simply a rare, vintage albino Rolex GMT. The KW is undeniably beautiful and has a solid place in the market considering no one is going to land the original. But still... there _was _an original. Homage, rep, all of these watches no matter how blatant are all guilty of the same thing, some just don't skirt the issue by changing the name on the dial.

Just my 2c.


----------



## OmegaCosmicMan (Apr 1, 2011)

Blueboost said:


> ........I mean, you shun the brand...........


:think: Opinions vary. ;-)

And, No, I don't "shun the brand." I've got a couple of older Rolexes that are probably older than you are. _(Edit: I looked at your profile, and my two vintage Rolexes pre-date your arrival on this earthly plane by about 7 years and 13 years respectively.)_ They have simple dials, proven workhorse movements,wonderful features and have drilled-through lugs.

I love 'em. 

The watch universe is a large, ever-expanding one. We are free - to have differing opinions, _aren't we_?

--- Best ---

;-)


----------



## Blueboost (Nov 6, 2008)

OmegaCosmicMan said:


> :think: Opinions vary. ;-)
> 
> And, No, I don't "shun the brand." I've got a couple of older Rolexes that are probably older than you are. They have simple dials, proven workhorse movements,wonderful features and have drilled-through lugs.
> 
> ...


Ah, I think I understand more clearly. You were more of a fan before the rolexrolexrolexrolexrolexrolexrolexrolex days. Can't blame a guy for having good taste, and I am glad you enjoy and appreciate what you have. 

We aren't old.. Perhaps i'm not as close to down side up as you, but I'm almost 40 and, well.. at the very least far and away from being a millennial! :-x


----------



## Arthur (Feb 11, 2006)

TheDude said:


> Bob Ridley makes for a pretty great experience. I'd say that's pretty similar. I sat with him while he was tearing down my Red. Also had a half dozen hour long conversations with him regarding work he was doing on my watch. He's probably a lot more interesting than the guy assembling or QCing the Rolexes at the factory.
> 
> I saw one of the rarest reference Submariners in his workshop while I was there too.
> 
> ...


I have a special place in my heart for Bob Ridley. After my late wife passed away, I was going through some of her watches and jewelry, trying to decide who between my daughter, daughter-in law and granddaughter would get what. I came across my wife's Rolex SS/ Gold Datejust. She wore this watch every day for years, and it showed it. The bracelet was stretched, and many of the Gold links were worn almost through. Also, it was running erratically. My wife took it in to and AD in Baton Rouge, and the guy she talked to told her it wasn't worth fixing and she should just trade it on a new one!! I had used Bob a couple of years before that to restore and old IWC pocket watch. I gave him a call and he told me to send it to him. He called me a week or so later to give me an update. He told me that the watch needed a service, a new crystal, bracelet, cleaned up and polished and it was good to go. Bob replaced the bracelet with a new Italian SS/Gold With the old clasp, a new bezel, crystal and service. When I unwrapped the watch, it looked like a brand new Rolex !! My daughter in law was thrilled to get the watch, a wonderful remembrance for her.
Fast forward two years, again talking to Bob about another Rolex and mentioned that I was planning to remarry. I told him I was looking for a ring, but wanted something different. He told me that he could help and had a good source of quality stones. I wanted a Sapphire center stone and triangular "Trilium" cut side stones. He sent me three sapphires to chose from and after the choice got the ring made, shipped it to me, and it was not only beautiful, but a huge hit with my soon to be wife. So that's my story of Bob, not only a fantastic watchmaker, but a really good guy as well!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------

