Maxi Bevel or Maxi Lugs?

Vintage Rolex Discussion

Maxi Bevel or Maxi Lugs?

Joined: October 4th, 2006, 9:33 pm

August 27th, 2012, 8:30 pm #1

What do you think?

Maxi Bevel, as Rolex did with new Heritage Tudors?
or Maxi Case with Maxi Lugs and disproportional end links?




56 years of difference, the ultimate Rolex Big Crown ref 6538 made in 1956 next to the new Maxi Cased 2012 Ceramic Submariner Ref 114060, alias Sub non date. Although my great friend Bernhard is very enthusiastic about the new look, ( same like me after seeing it at baselworld 2012 as Rolex best newcomer) im still puzzled about the Maxi step the lugs make to the bracelet, why I ask myself? To make it look bigger then it is?? New lugs appear raw & almost unfinished, gone is the elegance shape of a nice bevel Rolex taught us during their tool watch evolution as a most have..

When you for instance look at below picture and focus on the size of both the bracelets, the MAXI lugs miss the harmony we see in any other Submariner Rolex made before. The end links of the new ref 114060 Sub are as wide as its 56 year old brother but the case is now bigger, therefore the new Sub becomes almost square and due to the fragile look the bracelet gives now, proportion wise a design flaw, loosing at the same time its historical classic line ;-(

A simple solution could be adding a wider bracelet & en links, breaking the effect of the step the Maxi lug does, making it more look like we how Rolex did with 42 mm new Explorer II where we see harmony for even a 2 mm bigger case.



From the side its even more visible that the New Maxi Lugs ruin the slick design of a true classic.Amen.


Another solution to break down and add some decent Heritage is by sending the new Sub to Rolex Bexley Service in UK and let them add their famous fat bevel polish on the Maxi lugs instead and it will look like the Big Crown

Why is heres NO bevel on the new Submariner Ref 114060 ? Add a fat bevel and youve a winner! Ohh wait we also need a bigger second hand, its to small to get noticed now. Heritage / history wise we vintage guys call it a lolli pop, a big bubble luminous bubble second hand, would be much better as the new index are also maxi size but somebody (probably the same person that forgot to resize the hands of the new 39 mm Explorer I ref 114270 where the bubble of the second hand didnt grow when Rolex enhanced from 36mm to new 39mm Explorer I size) also forgot to add a bigger bubble on the new Sub seconds. Modern Rolex can become as beautiful as the old ones are, its just a matter of detail.



Evolution of the Rolex Submariner by crown guard, bevel, lugs, bezel and tropic



Rgrds.Philipp


Quote
Like
Share

dutchclock
VRF Member
dutchclock
VRF Member
Joined: September 2nd, 2007, 11:37 am

August 28th, 2012, 6:52 am #2

Hey P,

IMHO the 114060 is a fantastic looking piece with just two issues which prevent me from buying it. The lugs are far too wide and the step of to the bracelet looks weird. Besides the bracelet tapers too much but that might go hand in hand with the very broad lugs... maybe if the lugs would have some tapering and bevel, the bracelet would be perfectly in line with the design. And speaking of hands: they could also benefit fro a somewhat larger version.
However, having said that, I think the 114060 is a great design and cool looking watch.

cheers,
Mark
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: June 4th, 2008, 7:17 am

August 28th, 2012, 11:38 am #3

What do you think?

Maxi Bevel, as Rolex did with new Heritage Tudors?
or Maxi Case with Maxi Lugs and disproportional end links?




56 years of difference, the ultimate Rolex Big Crown ref 6538 made in 1956 next to the new Maxi Cased 2012 Ceramic Submariner Ref 114060, alias Sub non date. Although my great friend Bernhard is very enthusiastic about the new look, ( same like me after seeing it at baselworld 2012 as Rolex best newcomer) im still puzzled about the Maxi step the lugs make to the bracelet, why I ask myself? To make it look bigger then it is?? New lugs appear raw & almost unfinished, gone is the elegance shape of a nice bevel Rolex taught us during their tool watch evolution as a most have..

When you for instance look at below picture and focus on the size of both the bracelets, the MAXI lugs miss the harmony we see in any other Submariner Rolex made before. The end links of the new ref 114060 Sub are as wide as its 56 year old brother but the case is now bigger, therefore the new Sub becomes almost square and due to the fragile look the bracelet gives now, proportion wise a design flaw, loosing at the same time its historical classic line ;-(

A simple solution could be adding a wider bracelet & en links, breaking the effect of the step the Maxi lug does, making it more look like we how Rolex did with 42 mm new Explorer II where we see harmony for even a 2 mm bigger case.



From the side its even more visible that the New Maxi Lugs ruin the slick design of a true classic.Amen.


Another solution to break down and add some decent Heritage is by sending the new Sub to Rolex Bexley Service in UK and let them add their famous fat bevel polish on the Maxi lugs instead and it will look like the Big Crown

Why is heres NO bevel on the new Submariner Ref 114060 ? Add a fat bevel and youve a winner! Ohh wait we also need a bigger second hand, its to small to get noticed now. Heritage / history wise we vintage guys call it a lolli pop, a big bubble luminous bubble second hand, would be much better as the new index are also maxi size but somebody (probably the same person that forgot to resize the hands of the new 39 mm Explorer I ref 114270 where the bubble of the second hand didnt grow when Rolex enhanced from 36mm to new 39mm Explorer I size) also forgot to add a bigger bubble on the new Sub seconds. Modern Rolex can become as beautiful as the old ones are, its just a matter of detail.



Evolution of the Rolex Submariner by crown guard, bevel, lugs, bezel and tropic



Rgrds.Philipp

Philipp, I don't really care for the new watches myself but maybe you'd have more responses if you put a different watch to compare instead of the bigcrown. You make it hard to compare watches when I can't seem to look away long enough from that absolutely spectacular 6538 Lol, it reminds me of the time I was dating this good looking girl and then one time she brought her amazingly beautiful sister to be the third wheel on our date. No matter how hard I tried to look at my date and pay attention to her I couldn't keep my eyes off of her more beautiful sister! You make it hard to focus on anything but that beautiful bigcrown!

I agree about the second hand as the big bubble 6538 really makes the 114060 second hand look tiny. Looking at the case the first time I thought it was too blocky but after looking a couple times I'm starting to like it as it makes it look beefy and strong as a tool watch should be. It's a good size too without being overbearing. I could see wearing that watch while working on a car or something and not worrying about a ding here and there since you have so much metal to polish. If you wanted a rolex to actually use as a tool watch then in my novice opinion this would be one of your better options.
Quote
Like
Share

Bidi95
VRF Member
Bidi95
VRF Member
Joined: May 13th, 2009, 8:27 am

August 28th, 2012, 2:37 pm #4

What do you think?

Maxi Bevel, as Rolex did with new Heritage Tudors?
or Maxi Case with Maxi Lugs and disproportional end links?




56 years of difference, the ultimate Rolex Big Crown ref 6538 made in 1956 next to the new Maxi Cased 2012 Ceramic Submariner Ref 114060, alias Sub non date. Although my great friend Bernhard is very enthusiastic about the new look, ( same like me after seeing it at baselworld 2012 as Rolex best newcomer) im still puzzled about the Maxi step the lugs make to the bracelet, why I ask myself? To make it look bigger then it is?? New lugs appear raw & almost unfinished, gone is the elegance shape of a nice bevel Rolex taught us during their tool watch evolution as a most have..

When you for instance look at below picture and focus on the size of both the bracelets, the MAXI lugs miss the harmony we see in any other Submariner Rolex made before. The end links of the new ref 114060 Sub are as wide as its 56 year old brother but the case is now bigger, therefore the new Sub becomes almost square and due to the fragile look the bracelet gives now, proportion wise a design flaw, loosing at the same time its historical classic line ;-(

A simple solution could be adding a wider bracelet & en links, breaking the effect of the step the Maxi lug does, making it more look like we how Rolex did with 42 mm new Explorer II where we see harmony for even a 2 mm bigger case.



From the side its even more visible that the New Maxi Lugs ruin the slick design of a true classic.Amen.


Another solution to break down and add some decent Heritage is by sending the new Sub to Rolex Bexley Service in UK and let them add their famous fat bevel polish on the Maxi lugs instead and it will look like the Big Crown

Why is heres NO bevel on the new Submariner Ref 114060 ? Add a fat bevel and youve a winner! Ohh wait we also need a bigger second hand, its to small to get noticed now. Heritage / history wise we vintage guys call it a lolli pop, a big bubble luminous bubble second hand, would be much better as the new index are also maxi size but somebody (probably the same person that forgot to resize the hands of the new 39 mm Explorer I ref 114270 where the bubble of the second hand didnt grow when Rolex enhanced from 36mm to new 39mm Explorer I size) also forgot to add a bigger bubble on the new Sub seconds. Modern Rolex can become as beautiful as the old ones are, its just a matter of detail.



Evolution of the Rolex Submariner by crown guard, bevel, lugs, bezel and tropic



Rgrds.Philipp

... Maxi Tool Watch!!

[/IMG]

And also Maxi Chic!!!

[/IMG]

By the way, I think a 6205 would have been more appropriate to compare against a 114060.
And I know you have a very nice one...



All the best,
Mehdi
Last edited by Bidi95 on August 28th, 2012, 3:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

dcfis
VRF Member
dcfis
VRF Member
Joined: December 28th, 2008, 8:53 am

August 29th, 2012, 4:04 pm #5

That is all, every watch worth having they already made.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 23rd, 2005, 9:30 pm

August 30th, 2012, 8:36 pm #6

What do you think?

Maxi Bevel, as Rolex did with new Heritage Tudors?
or Maxi Case with Maxi Lugs and disproportional end links?




56 years of difference, the ultimate Rolex Big Crown ref 6538 made in 1956 next to the new Maxi Cased 2012 Ceramic Submariner Ref 114060, alias Sub non date. Although my great friend Bernhard is very enthusiastic about the new look, ( same like me after seeing it at baselworld 2012 as Rolex best newcomer) im still puzzled about the Maxi step the lugs make to the bracelet, why I ask myself? To make it look bigger then it is?? New lugs appear raw & almost unfinished, gone is the elegance shape of a nice bevel Rolex taught us during their tool watch evolution as a most have..

When you for instance look at below picture and focus on the size of both the bracelets, the MAXI lugs miss the harmony we see in any other Submariner Rolex made before. The end links of the new ref 114060 Sub are as wide as its 56 year old brother but the case is now bigger, therefore the new Sub becomes almost square and due to the fragile look the bracelet gives now, proportion wise a design flaw, loosing at the same time its historical classic line ;-(

A simple solution could be adding a wider bracelet & en links, breaking the effect of the step the Maxi lug does, making it more look like we how Rolex did with 42 mm new Explorer II where we see harmony for even a 2 mm bigger case.



From the side its even more visible that the New Maxi Lugs ruin the slick design of a true classic.Amen.


Another solution to break down and add some decent Heritage is by sending the new Sub to Rolex Bexley Service in UK and let them add their famous fat bevel polish on the Maxi lugs instead and it will look like the Big Crown

Why is heres NO bevel on the new Submariner Ref 114060 ? Add a fat bevel and youve a winner! Ohh wait we also need a bigger second hand, its to small to get noticed now. Heritage / history wise we vintage guys call it a lolli pop, a big bubble luminous bubble second hand, would be much better as the new index are also maxi size but somebody (probably the same person that forgot to resize the hands of the new 39 mm Explorer I ref 114270 where the bubble of the second hand didnt grow when Rolex enhanced from 36mm to new 39mm Explorer I size) also forgot to add a bigger bubble on the new Sub seconds. Modern Rolex can become as beautiful as the old ones are, its just a matter of detail.



Evolution of the Rolex Submariner by crown guard, bevel, lugs, bezel and tropic



Rgrds.Philipp

No mods can be made to original specs by Rolex UK.

for example if you wanted the centre links polished on your 16520 they will not do it.

i agree Philipp, the new non date sub would look amazing with the 6538 bevel look and correctly sized second hand.



---Perpetual Knowledge---
-Perpetual Knowledge-
Quote
Like
Share