Is it true what I hear -- you can use a Rolex watch as a hammer in survival situations?

LOL, no they're not that tough, but to make up for it they don't keep time as well as a Casio G-Shock you can get for $50. OTOH, they make great safe queens.

BTW, if you do own a Rolex, make sure you have the seals/gaskets/O-rings replaced every 5 years, especially if you really think the watch needs to be waterproof. They're great watches as long as you pay $$ to keep them great. Expensive to buy, expensive to maintain and they keep OK time.

Seiko is marketing a new watch that updates via the GPS constellation. Not only does it update to the second, it also updates your timezone. Costs as much as a Rolex, but it keeps better time.

Disclaimer: I own a Rolex Submariner that had corrosion inside the case because I didn't pay... it's a great safe queen. I wear a Tough Solar, Atomic G-Shock.

Rolex used to make a toughened Tritium Submariner for the SBS, but you wouldn't want to use it as a hammer especially since they now cost around $50,000 to $60,000 (Second hand market)

I like the Submariners without the date window. One reason I stopped wearing mine at all is because every time it ran down from too little use, I had to reset the date. BTW, the Maratac mechanical watches marketed by CountyComm use a Citizen/Miyota automatic movement, have no date window and keep pretty good time. Much less pricey to buy than cleaning the watch shown above.

My cell phone does this, and fairly versatile....

Was that a cherry nuke, neutron bomb or a good old fashioned bomb pumped x-ray laser? 'Course the Rolex would probably survive...

If you want to use a watch as a hammer then an el cheapo Invicta Seaspider 0138 might be a better bet.

http://www.amazon.com/Invicta-0138-Collection-Stainless-Polyurethane/dp/B003UNZ07W

The Seaspider keeps reasonable time as well. My one has gained about 24 seconds in the last 6 months. Well within the Swiss made quartz movement specs. Probably not suited for Ectomorphs though!

Mine has been working fine for about 5 years now. I paid about $80 for it. I got more than my money's worth 3 years ago. When this watch goes bad, I'll throw it away and start over.

Although not confined to Rolex, is your watch good for survival situations? My watch is a Casio Pro Trek. I like it mainly because it is solar, tough and waterproof.

I wear the Casio MTGM900DA-8. I wear it when I'm awake, and I actually use it. (I don't wear it while sleeping only because the Atomic time update doesn't always work with the watch on my wrist.) I don't like taking my cell phone out just to check the time or date. Also, I like working out with my watch, but not with my cell phone.

I like the Casio G-Shock because I normally don't wear a watch at all. When I do wear it, it shows the correct time to the second. That's all I need from a watch.

FWIW, I've worn a GMT Master II aprox. 7x24 for the last 25 years or so without a single service. While it is true I may be pushing my luck, they don't necessarily self destruct.

OTOH, while my GMT has been good to me, I prol would get an Omega Seamaster if I were to do it again. A lot of what you are paying for with Rolex is the name IMO.

OTOOH, it's a tough watch. I will never again buy a watch w/o a sapphire window. I've smashed the watch into a concrete wall w/no scratch. In fact, after 25 years of abuse, the window is nearly perfect (can't say the same for the rest of the watch. bezel is deeply faded, needs a re-lume, etc).

That, compaired to my last watch, which was a Casio G Shock. Deep scratches all over the window. And I did kill that one. Or at least, the housing broke in such a way a strap could not be attached and thus was unwearable.

But your point is fair. Folks sometimes don't realize how much it costs to have these watches properly maintained. I certainly didn't.

-john

Which of these watches come with a retractible piano wire for garroting the sentry during undercover ops?

For some reason I never felt the draw of expensive watches. They don't look that great to me. You can have more beautiful ornaments for less -- design for me is key. But then again I don't get diamonds, either. They're just shiny stones. Useful for cutting glass, though. So I guess I'm weird.

Yikes! I don't think I've ever owned a car that cost as much as some of those Rolex watches! I think I'll stick to my Timex Expedition Indiglo.

So, I am cheap, cheap, cheap !!!

Last week I have bought THREE watches and a clock
Total for all : $ 187

Rolex isn't for me.

I visited Dubai some 38 years ago and bought two Submariners and a Perpetual Date. Popped back into the retailer last year, they were amazed I still had the receipt!

The Submariners I sold for a massive profit, enough to cover all the cost of the watches and gold I bought.

The Perpetual Date has been on my wrist ever since, a few services and a new wristband. It is totally reliable, still an accurate chronometer.

That is the Rolex advantage, total utter reliability, it is there, it is correct, it needs no special treatment. If I can survive it, so will my watch.

I had one of the six prototype Sea-dwellers for test for a couple of months. Not well made and the helium relief valve rusted as it was non stainless but it worked well but really frayed my shirt cuff.

Expensive watches are as much, if not more so, jewelry as they are time pieces. A Rolex is a very fine timepiece, but it's also a conspicuous piece off men's jewelry.

If you want some heart attack prices, check out the Patek Philippe watches. I could pay off my mortgage with one off those.

That being said, I wear a Timex or Casio most days.

I just did an internet search -- they are running a sale on the Patek Philippe Grand Complications watch! $15,000 off! For only $970,000, you can tell what time it is! With all that saving, you can put a down payment on a small house.

Rolex are great watches. But you don't only get the name when you buy one. Servicing is crucial for any timepiece. Rolex replaces all the gaskets when it gets serviced. Being "oyster perpetual", which refers to the case being water resistant,and the perpetual means an automatic movement, that baby will keep great time for years and years and years. Lets see a cheap G-Shock do that. True, when the battery goes you can a replacement. No watch is ever waterproof, and any watch marketed as such, you should steer well clear of. Patek make luxury watches, not "tool" watches. Give me an auto diver any day, but then again I already have about ten auto divers. No Rolex's, but then I really don't want one.
Izzy, look at reluming the dial and hands with Superluminova, but contact a very reputable Rolex dealer so you keep the value of the watch intact. The dealer will send it back directly to Rolex for the work to be done. They should also service it, again to maintain the waterproofness, and it may need to be regulated again.

It may be better but with respects to Rolex I could buy a hundred G-shocks and just throw them away every six weeks and still be ahead money wise!

Speaking of renewing the luminous dials, I have a Seiko diver's watch that I have had for for almost 30 years. I have replaced the band several times, but the watch has held up to extreme abuse. It no longer glows in the dark, though. I would like to renew the dial, but have never explored the options for getting it done. Has anyone ever done this before? What new materials are out there?

Rolex etal have been overtaken by technology. If I need the official, precise time (as in opening or closing a polling place) I need look no further than the nearest cellphone or GPS. For convenience I still wear a venerable Casio which needs a battery about every two or three years.It's accuracy approaches chronometer grade, but I no longer use a sextant for navigation....

Check out this thread:
http://forums.watchuseek.com/f21/dial-luminizing-photo-tutorial-519055.html

A Rolex is a very expensive peice of jewelry that happens to incorporate a clock. A Rolex is fine if you wish to make a fashion statement. As a survival item, I see no practical advantage of a Rolex over an ordinary digital watch that costs a tiny fraction.

In some situations, wearing a Rolex could have negative value for survival. Wearing a Rolex says "I have money" and/or "I am important". If you were a bad guy looking for a target to rob or kidnap, who would you select? The guy wearing the Timex watch? ..... Or the guy wearing the Rolex?

On the other hand (sorry) you might also be able to use the Rolex to buy yourself out of a situation. It could go either way depending on the circumstances.

And if they they don't like the deal you offer, they can just shoot you and take the watch.

If your in that bad a situation, just take the watch off. I've done that on just a couple occasions...situational awareness is key, after all.

The advantages over other watches that cost a tiny fraction, is the fact that the automatics take no batteries, their water resistance is usually greater than the cheap watches. If the watch says is 200M WR, and it costs $50, it probably isn't.
Rolex has a screw down crown usually. If they don't, they have a series of gaskets that keep the water out of the movement. I won't ket into all the features that make it the world's best selling watch brand. Look it up if your curious. PLUS the resell value is certainly there. Try reslling a $30 Casio.

With a Rolex you're buying jewelry as well as a timepiece. G-shocks are just timepieces with a lot of complications. There's no artistic value to them. Comparing the two isn't an apple to apple comparison. It's more like a kiwi to lime comparison.

Don't take this the wrong way, and for the record I don't care if you buy $1,000,000 watches- but I can't imagine any of these things being big pluses for most people. For instance, I'm not waterproof to 200m, so if my watch it at 200m it's gonna have to go without me and it'll have to stay there. And if I don't blow ten grand on the watch that's ten grand I'll still have, no need to pawn my Timex. A CD is still going to be a better investment than a watch.

But I suppose if I won the Powerball, once I had all the HK firearms, high end knives, sports cars and collectible comics I could find...well, maybe then I'd consider something "better" than a Timex Expedition.

I do not always wear a watch. But when I do, it's a Casio. Stay punctual, my friends.

LOL, I like that. When I wear a watch it's also a Casio (MTG 900 Stainless). If you wear a Rolex you need to wear it always so it stays wound or buy one of those storage cases that slowly winds the watch for you. I'd rather wear a fairly good looking watch that needs virtually no maintenance.

My G-Shock is solar so the battery doesn't need to be replaced. I park it by a window so the battery charges during the day and coincidentally puts it in good location to receive the WWV timing signal at night.

There are also fairly cheap automatics (Seico sells some around 100€).
Seico, Casio and Citizen sell quartz watches with solar panels and radio control for accuracy. Those watches also start around 100€. Their water resistance is sufficient unless you are a scuba diver. A mechanical watch can hardly compete with their accuracy. The components could be sealed in solid block of resin. That would provide total WR without relying on gaskets. And it would not depend on gaskets.
Rolex watches are still an excellent design. With modern manufacturing methods their movements are not as outstanding as they used to be.
I am still a fan of mechanical movements. I wear them daily. I keep a couple of pocket watches running too. However I came to the conclusion that a Rolex does not offer enough function for the money. I do not envy anyone who owns one.


That may offer quite a surprise. In the GDR they used to make a pocket watch that sold for 5 Mark (which was really cheap at that time). If you can get one, you might have to spend around 500$. Try to match that quota with a regular Rolex.

Technology changes and as near as I can tell its hard to beat the overall reliability and durability that a G-Shock can provide. I'm thinking specifically about models with features like tough solar, atomic time, shock & low temperature resistance ... they seem pretty much bomb proof, the solar provides a newer-tech version of the automatic and the atomic time keeps you accurate and even automatically compensates for DST (I had a Casio Waveceptor at one point in time and, while not all that durable, the atomic time was a nice feature).

When it comes to choosing a watch specifically with reliability and durability in mind it's hard for the G-Shock not to land on the top of list. Frankly, I'm not a huge fan of the aesthetics of most of the models, but from a pure practical stand point they seem to have anything you'd need.

I'm with you. My ideal watch would be digital, solar powered, super reliable and durable, be thin and look great. I would cheerfully pay for a compass, barometer/altimeter, and useful temperature gauge.

There's a Casio Pathfinder PAW1500T around here someplace -- Tough Solar, Atomic, Digital Compass, Altimeter, Barometer, Thermometer, yada yada yada, Titanium case and wristband -- All that and it's too big and doesn't want to fit my wrist. A real Casio dealer might be able to adjust the band. Other than not fitting it's a nice watch.

A useful temperature gauge in a wristwatch is an illusion. Tissot sells watches with temperature gauge. Last time I looked in a manual it said that you need to take the watch off and let it sit for about 15 minutes before you get a fairly accurate measurement. It seems they use the gauge for compensating temperature influence on the oscillator and allow to display it as one more gadget.
A thin watch might be quicker with the reading.
Maybe designing and building a watch like your ideal watch could become a project for the ETS community.

I need a "like" button for that comment.



Analog time with numbered indices
Digital date, countdown timer, stop watch, and (3) alarms with vibration option functions.
Indigo style backlighting (stays lit for however long the button is pressed)
GITD hand and face hour markings
2032 battery (nice long battery life)
Battery replacement with ordinary tools
FRP (fiber reinforced plastic) case
Acrylic lens (easy to repair)
100M water resistant
<$100 MSRP

Since so many people love the Casio G-Shock, I took a look out of curiosity. My, are they ugly! The acceptable ones (MT-G black or silver metal) are really expensive ($900-$1,000)! You'd think they'd be able to hit upon a good color scheme when making so many different combinations.

As for the "water resistant down to 200m" thing, wouldn't you rather have a dive computer on your wrist? If your watch can survive a swim in the pool, that's more than what most people will ever need. How come when it comes to watches, most guys want the specs for Navy SEAL space superhero?

Keep in mind water resistance ratings are kinda weird, they don't mean what you might think they mean because it's a static measurement applied to dynamic situations. Essentially the rating system looks like this:

30m means it can get wet (rain/brief submerge)
50m means you can dunk it/light swimming
100m is swimming/light snorkling
200m is for extended snorkling/light recreational diving

Many consider a 200m rating to be the bare minimum for an all around watch, as it's water resistant enough to cover any activity the average person might partake in.

I hear you. Functionally they seem to be everything you'd want in an outdoors watch, but I can't get over their size & aesthetics.

Too chunky for me. Too big for your wrist is fixable -- any jewelry or watch repair place at the mall can do this in minutes.

I'm a pretty modern guy for the most part. I'm really into modern polymer guns (I have six HKs including a USC carbine), I collect LED lights and I'm heavily into digital audio and video. But for some weird reason I can't stand digital watches. Maybe it's my age or whatever but if I see the time displayed numerically it doesn't register with my brain like it does seeing hour and minute hands. I admit this is weird but I'll wear analog watches as long as I'm alive and they're still made.

You know, when I think about it a watch is an anachronism nowadays. IRL I'm one of the only people I know that still wears one. I feel naked without it but my brother that's nearly the same age as me hasn't worn one in ten years. Since everyone has a cell phone and nearly every computer and electronic gadget seems to display the time it feels like watches are getting almost uncommon now.

It is possible to buy mechanical, hand wind, watches without having to pay thousands of dollars.
Like my Smiths from England. A copy of the military watches from the 50´s/60´s. Mine cost about 300 british pounds and that included postage fee.

That´s a nice simple watch. I got a copy of a WWII aviator´s watch. Those watches had the movement of a pocket watch for better accuracy. I paid around 100€ for mine.



However when it came some assembly was required:

Don't worry, Phaedrus; I'll be the other guy with a wristwatch (only it will be digital)...

All this watch talk again has me looking for another watch.

I also like the titanium Series of Citizen Eco-drive Solar Watch. This looks the business being a toughened up Commando Watch. Now if it only had a Tritium Dials and watch face like my Luminox!

http://www.citizenshop.co.uk/index.php/r...bn0110-06e.html

Here's one of mine built like a tank.




Another auto that I find myself wearing just as a beater:

I'm one of the few left in my office that still wears a wristwatch. There's a couple of high end dress watches, a G-Shock, and my Timex. Everybody else relies on their cell phones. I personally finds it annoying to have to dig it out whenever I want to check the time or date.

I prefer analog watches, but to be fair, I could wear one of those oversized sport watches if I could attach it to my belt.

Cheapness is relative. For a few hundred dollars you can get something with sufficient quality, that is still massively cheaper than a Rolex. The 200M WR refers to static pressure, as Paul810 said. A solar watch doesn't need new batteries every few years.

I recently bought an automatic watch, partly to see what they were like, partly because I wanted a slide-rule dial, and partly because my Casio isn't very dressy. I was disappointed. From what I've read, it needs a few hundred dollars spent on maintenance every few years else the workings will wear out and the oil congeal. If civilisation collapses, I suspect my digital watch will keep better time for longer than my automatic.

I have one with a plastic strap - which I much prefer. I love it. Being solar and atomic it's an excellent time-piece, and I also use most of the gadgets.

I abuse my watch. I bang it against things constantly, swim three times a week with it and keep in one while alpine climbing, rock climbing, etc. My €30 casio (non g-shock model) last about 5 years, with no maintenance or batteries. Well actually the watch keeps running, it's the strap that breaks.