back to top

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

Not everyone loves Rolex, but the brand has a storied history and has made numerable important contributions to horology that cannot be refuted. For instance, Rolex is widely credited with creating the first water-resistant watch; it is also responsible for the first watch with an automatically changing date, the Datejust; and the first watch to show two timezones at once, the GMT-Master. Our attention today is on the Rolex GMT-Master, or rather, the Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR – but first, a little history.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

The modern Rolex GMT-Master II was introduced in 2005 in the form of the all-gold GMT-Master II Ref. 116718LN. It was to be an anniversary model, and so came with a green dial in Rolex’s signature hue. This new Rolex GMT-Master II’s diameter was unchanged at 40mm, but it possessed what is now sometimes known as the “Super Case” and “Maxi Dial” – Rolex-speak for larger case and dial with fatter markers, respectively – and so it looks and wears larger than its 40mm size would suggest. And  for the first time, it came with a ceramic bezel that Rolex claims to be virtually scratch and fade-proof. Other changes include a larger Trip-lock crown, a new bracelet with polished center links and Easylink extension, green 24-hour hand, and a new movement, the calibre 3186. The new 3186 movement has no new functions over the older calibre 3185, but it is equipped with Rolex’s new Parachrom hairspring and the operation of the jumping hour hand is now smoother and more precise.

A year after the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116718LN, Rolex released the half-gold, or two-tone, version known as the Ref. 116713LN; and in 2007, finally released the all-steel Ref. 116710LN. While no one could argue about the technical refinements of the new Rolex GMT-Master II watches, one thing that was conspicuously missing from these new watches was the bi-color bezels that made the older Rolex GMT-Master watches so recognizable. In case you were wondering, the older models had aluminum bezel inserts, which could be quite easily printed. But ceramic is a much harder material to work with, and for a long time, Rolex has said that it was impossible to make a bi-color bezel in ceramic.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

So, imagine our surprise then, when in Baselworld 2013 Rolex unveiled a new steel Rolex GMT-Master II with a blue and black ceramic bezel – the Ref. 116710BLNR (BLNR for bleu/noir). It was easily one of the stars at last year’s show, and we noted in our hands-on last year just how well-made the new ceramic bezel is, and how good-looking the watch is in the flesh.

Judging from the fact that Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR pieces are flying off the shelves – and that the resale value is extremely close to retail prices, even by Rolex standards – it seems that we are not the only ones who think so. In fact, many dealers, at least in my part of the world, are actually charging a premium for this piece. And it was only after much looking around and inquiring that I managed to find a dealer who was happy to sell it at retail price.

For this review, I’m not going to tell you about the features and technical details of this watch, I think the capabilities of the calibre 3186 have been well covered in our earlier review of the steel and gold Ref. 116713. Besides, the Rolex GMT-Master II is such a popular watch that it should be no stranger to most people. But I will say that the case is solidly constructed and well polished, and the bracelet and clasp are also of the highest quality. Additionally, the Easylink extension, which allows the bracelet to be discreetly extended by 5mm, is a lifesaver on warm days. Not everyone is going to be a fan of the polished center-links, but I like it as it distinguishes the GMT-Master II from the Submariner and makes it look a little dressier.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

What I’m mostly going to talk about instead is that new blue and black bezel, and whether it is worth paying the price difference over the standard Ref. 116710LN. As it stands, the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR currently commands a premium of around $600 over the Ref. 116710LN price.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

Now, the bi-color ceramic bezel is quite a technical feat and actually starts off as blue, with the black mixed in later using a patented Rolex process. It is known that the second tone is achieved by masking one half of the bezel and exposing the unmasked half to a special chemical treatment. The transition between the two colors is flawless and extremely sharp, with no perceptible bleeding or fuzziness. The engraved numerals are then finished off with thin coating of platinum to give a glossy, three-dimensional look that is both striking and legible.

Admittedly, the combo of blue and black is an unusual choice for Rolex, and has never been done prior this Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR. Color is of course a highly subjective topic, but blue does make some sense – blue for the daytime hours and black for the nighttime hours. So if blue is not your color, I guess you can stop reading here and just opt for the Ref. 116710LN.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

However, if you are neutral towards blue or partial to it, the next thing to note is that the hue of the blue changes depending on the light. In bright environments, under direct sunlight, for example, the blue is strikingly brilliant and is stunning to behold, and at certain angles, it looks almost purplish. In low lighting, the blue somehow disappears, and the bezel looks almost completely black. It wouldn’t be a stretch to say that this bi-color bezel is something of a chameleon of sorts.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

I appreciate such a quality in a watch, and I think it adds a lot of visual pizzazz and variety, when compared to the plain black bezel of the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710LN. And, in my personal experience, no amount of pictures can do justice to the way the bezel reacts to the light; I do not speak only for myself, because this is a view shared by many other owners of this watch. Honestly, your thoughts about this watch may change after seeing it in the flesh.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

But this quality of the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR can also work against it, especially if what you want is a more serious and somber timepiece. In my opinion, the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR is definitely more casual and fun and if that is not your thing, then you might be better off with the Ref. 116710LN’s black bezel. The Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710LN is a bona fide modern classic that can do no wrong in my books.

Although the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR and Ref. 116710LN are essentially identical save for the bezel (and the blue hour hand and white GMT-Master II text on the dial), these two watches don’t cost the same. And some of you might be wondering if the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR’s around $600 premium is worth it. I personally think so. For one, this is not only Rolex’s, but in fact, the world’s first bi-color ceramic bezel ever. Secondly, I like that Rolex has gone for blue and black instead of blue and red or black and red. Blue and black is a first and I think it also makes it very unique. Lastly, I like how the blue of the bezel takes on different hues as it plays with light.

Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR Watch Review Wrist Time Reviews

Ultimately, if you are sitting on the fence and having trouble deciding between the Rolex GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR and Ref. 116710LN, I’m going to give you a very cliche but effective advice: go and try both of them on. I keep going back to this, but it is a very important aspect of the Ref. 116710BLNR, and the way the bezel plays with light needs to be experienced first-hand. Finally, to sum both watches up in a sentence, I would say that the Ref. 116710LN is classic and practical, and the Ref. 116710BLNR is a little bit more fun and special. The Rolex GMT-Master II 116710BLNR has a list price of $8950.

Necessary Data
>Brand: Rolex
>Model: GMT-Master II Ref. 116710BLNR
>Price: $8,950
>Size: 40 mm
>Would reviewer personally wear it: Yes
>Friend we’d recommend it to first: Someone who is looking for a GMT watch or a Rolex that looks a little more special.
>Best characteristic of watch: The color-changing blue and black bezel.
>Worst characteristic of watch: The ubiquity of Rolex.

About the Author

Kenny is very much an analog man; preferring mechanical watches to quartz watches, driving with a stick as opposed to paddles on the wheel, and shopping at brick and mortar shops than online. He has one golden rule when it comes buying watches: always, always, see the watch in person first before committing to a purchase. 
What do you think?
  • I love it! (60)
  • I want it! (14)
  • Thumbs up (4)
  • Classy (3)
  • Interesting (3)



Disqus Debug thread_id: 3991159219

  • nickyb66

    A great review, thanks for doing this. I did think of a GMT but in the end decided to go for the Submarine with Date/Ceramic as I had no real need for a second (or third) timezone, and waterproofness was a bit more of a priority for me. I do know the GMT sits lower on the wrist than my sub, I guess this is because of the stronger and thicker sub case back.

    The GMT I do like is the white gold red/black version, but what a price!

  • 5803822

    Think I’ve been converted to a pro Rolex ABTW fan – the important aspect :- the quality can be relied on – and felt on the wrist – a precision motor – so buy and forget -no need to think of alternatves for the rest of your natural- all under $10K – decent value by today’s standards.

  • marbstiu

    I believe this is the first time rolex did a black&blue, which is a pretty good reason to buy this one.

  • This ‘Batman’ GMT watch has actually caught my eye. I went to an AD to try and get some of that first hand experience, but they didn’t have one to show me. I am very publicly not a Rolex guy, but this watch is probably one of the best looking things they’ve done. I just wish they would revamp that tired, stale handset.

  • Fraser Petrick

    marbstiu  Let me see. I have $9000 in my cookie tin. What to do with it? What to do with it? The new Rolex has a black and blue bezel: aha!, problem solved!

  • DangerussArt

    1500 word bezel review? I think we’ve maxxed out the nerdometer today. 🙂

  • David Niw

    My dream

  • I’m glad I bought my 116710BLNR last year. I was very close to getting the JLC Master Ultra Thin Moon in stainless steel, but decided to get the Rolex. It’s incredibly accurate (+1sec/day dial up, 1sec/day crown down) and it’s a great fit on my wrist.

  • JeffBlack

    Good review. This will be the first watch i’ll buy when i win the Powerball Jackpot. Lol.

  • bowlclogger

    What was your experience re. accuracy?  I bought one of these this past summer. Out of the box, it lost 6 seconds every 24 hours (on a winder). After a month, nothing changed, so I sent it in for servicing. It took 7 weeks to get it back, 7 weeks for a simple regulation adjustment, and it still loses 3 seconds a day. (And yes, I’m aware of the gravity method of regulating a Rolex, it just sucks to not be able to leave it on a winder for more than a day is all.) This is my first Rolex. It’s the first one that’s ever caught my eye, so I went for it. I have to say I’m not entirely impressed with its accuracy. I expected better, given Rolex’s reputation. I can’t fault it for any other characteristic, however. It has a fit and feel of solidity unlike any other watch I’ve come across.

  • Janez Zlato Šuštar

    Best Rolex ever, I love mine.

  • bowlclogger My 116710BLNR is +1 sec/day dial up, -1 sec/day crown down. As far as losing 6 seconds a day, that’s definitely a bit outside of COSC spec. If you can find a watch repair center that has a timing machine, have them test it and give you the readings of it in all six positions to see how it runs in each of the 6 positions. In the end, you want to have a watch that gains time more than loses it, since it’s easier to just pull the crown out if it’s running fast and then push the crown back in to get it in sync.

  • shinytoys

    It’s older brother was my first grail watch. Nice work Kenny.

  • thornwood36

    This is what it is.  A Rolex steeped in history and quality, but its just really boring. I know they use that date magnifier because that’s what Rolex does, but its a feature i cant see the point in.

  • BGPT23

    bowlclogger -3 seconds a day is pretty accurate for a mechanical watch, and that is within the expected standard that Rolexes are tested to perform at – Chronometer Certified watches are accurate to between -4 and +6 seconds per day. I know that some people expect better accuracy than that if they are paying a premium for a watch, however the nature of mechanical movements is that they aren’t going to be perfectly accurate ever. If perfect accuracy is needed, you need to get a HAQ (High-Accuracy Quartz) watch, which will still lose or gain time, but only a few seconds per year. Realistically though, at -3 seconds per day, that means your watch will be a minute slow after 20 days. It takes 10 seconds to adjust the time and get that minute back. Or, you can set it so that it’s a minute fast, and then you will have 40 days until it is a minute slow. 10 seconds to adjust it every 40 days isn’t bad. And I don’t know about you, but the fact that my watch might be one minute slow isn’t the cause of whether or not I’m late for something.

  • Shawnnny

    I’ve never seen so much hair!
    Buying a Rolex would be like paying Ferrari prices for a Honda. You’ll get a well built car, but damn is it boring. I really wish Rolex would come out with something exciting.

  • thornwood36

    I would love a Rolex, i really would, ,The history, the quality and robustness. legible and everything else, but if someone gave me nine thousand dollars i would not  leave the watch shop with this on my wrist.. Its super boring for the price and i know the magnified date is pure Rolex, but i cant see the point of it really.

  • ocabj And you can go swimming in the Rolex. I don’t think the review even touched on the fact that the new generation GMTs are “Triplock” protected now.

  • SuperStrapper One of my biggest peeves with the new “maxi dial” Rolexes (except for the Explorer II) is that they all retain the teeny tiny seconds hand! Hell…if you’re going to “maxi dial” a watch, then bring back the huge lollipop seconds hand!

  • thornwood36 What watch would you buy with $9K?

  • bichondaddy

    Shawnnny WTH……a $600 premium for a black and blue Bezel?????  As we say here in Texas….”They’re mighty proud of that now aren’t they!”  I wonder what the premium would be for a nice blue dial…..what…another $2000???
    Oh…I’ll answer ocabj’s question…”What watch would I buy with $9K?”   Well…I think I would tell you what watches I would buy for $9K!!!
    1.   Breitling Superocean Heritage 46   MSRP of $4080….I can get it for around $2900 online.    Love the 46mm size…blue dial….blue rubber strap….awesome looking.

    2.  Tissot T-Race….Quartz Chronograph….Orange Rubber Strap…MSRP  $650….I can find them all day under $600 online.  I love orange…my college Alma Mater colors.  

    Then I would shop around for some sports watches…..NFW has some cool pilots watches that are pretty reasonable….and then there is his Viper Fish… big, bad ass watch that I have been in love with since they hit the market.  There is just so much out on the market that is nicer looking…not as boring….and well…..they aren’t Rolex’s!  They need to get out of the 1960’s and 70’s and maybe come up with something totally different.  I was hoping Tudor would explore some different designs…but they are just Rolex Lite…..1/3rd the price and twice as boring!!
    My apologies to all the Rolex fan boys….but man…what is all the fuss about?  Every watch company around has a watch that looks like this…performs like this….and for goodness sake….cost way less!  Yeah….yeah…yeah…I’ve heard about their legendary performance…yadda…yadda…yadda!!!!  To me….a Rolex is like a gal who was stunning looking back in 1970…..and now in her mid 60’s…she gets a boob job.’ve still got a 60 something year old woman…only now she has the boobs of a 20 year old. She still isn’t a 20 year old hottie though!!

  • iamcalledryan

    This watch is at the top of my “acheivable” list. It’s stunning and the GMT / duel time function is my all time first equal complication alongside power reserve indicator.
    Love the batman

  • iamcalledryan

    um, no. Those alternatives you note are nice, but not close. Where else can you get a two tone ceramic bezel? YEs you can buy other watches for less. I think the premium you pay for Rolex is as much a deposit on the resale value as it is paying for pure goodwill. Bottom line Rolex is actually as good as it alludes to, and it’s owners include a segment of the market that includes lots of people who know lots about watches – not just fanboys. I spent years as a passionate watch fan before I allowed myself to admire Rolex – they were so predictable.
    No they are not the great industry disrupters, but I admire their consistency, and it has paid them well. I could do without the cyclops but this is a very handsome watch and if you really assess all of the components of the watch you will realize why it simply is NOT comparable to other watches that may look similar.

  • bichondaddy

    iamcalledryan Sorry…I’d take a Breitling any day over a Rolex.  I don’t see a Breitling being a Cheaper watch either…your words..not mine!  And yes…I’ve had 2 Rolex’s in my life….a 1984 Rolex Explorer II…which spent more time in the shop than it ever did on my wrist….and a Sub…which I despised to no end… can find my reason for despising it in another area.  I sold it after it’s usefulness had ended and did not care what I got for it!  
    I am at an age where I wear what I like….plain and simple.  I don’t wear a watch to impress my friends, women…other watch fanatics…and my wife could care less what watch I wear….she knows I wear what I like….and as long as they make happy…that’s enough for her!!

    If you like having a Rolex on your arm…fine.  But me…they don’t do anything for me….I find them boring looking…and like I said in my post…they are about as attractive to me as a 60 year old woman with a boob job!!!

  • Chaz_Hen ocabj The text skims it, but the video review did specifically call it out.

  • thornwood36 I didn’t either, until I tested out a watch with one, and, while it is a bit gimmicky, it is a feature that is handy, especially if your eyesight isn’t perfect.

  • aleximd2000

    Shawnnny show me your hand instead
    If you don’t have hair on it but  you shaved it then your hand looks like a fresh shaved woman’s  ‘volvo’

  • aleximd2000

    ocabj I envy you because you were in budget
    I’ve just moved and I don’t have money to cross the street not to tell buying a Rolex. Maybe next year

  • Robin Henry

    The Rolex is overpriced and overrated. I don’t doubt its mechanical perfection, but dozens of watches have been produced that look almost identical and many are much less expensive. Rolex is probably good for those who want to show they have enough funds to buy one. However, it looks almost identical to my now aged Tag-Heuer Professional 1000 diving watch (gold and stainless colour) and some of the Seiko divers that are much less expensive.

    Oris, (in photo) Maurice Lacroix, Citizen, Longines all have much more interesting diver’s watches that are far less expensive eg, the ML is elegant for around $3,000. Rolex is now “old hat” … the world has moved on. It would be good to see Rolex put out a new diver that is different from the style that has been round for so long.

  • Robin Henry That Oris is kind of a cop out on the Omega Seamaster Pro wave dial.

  • Shawnnny

    It’s called trimmed. Refer to pictures of Ariel Adams wrist for an example.

  • bichondaddy If I was going to go big like a Breitling Superocean 46, I’d rather get an Omega Planet Ocean 45.5mm or the Omega Ploprof. Or spend a little more and get a Blancpain Fifty Fathoms (regular or Bathyscaphe). Note: My last purchase was the Bathyscaphe.
    I used to have a similar attitude as yours regarding Rolex, until I actually found one I liked. Is Rolex ‘cliched’? Perhaps. Is it a good watch? Definitely. Should you own at least one? If you’re a watch enthusiast, definitely.

  • Robin Henry

    ocabj Robin Henry You could be right, but it’s still a nice watch and the Oris has a good range of divers.

  • bichondaddy

    ocabj  Like I said…I’ve owned two in my life….so I have been there…done that.  The Planet Ocean is a nice watch….if I was so inclined….I would have one.  Blancpain is a bit beyond my budget right now….but I love their watches.  The Breitling I like is my grail watch right now….I keep hoping for my Powerball numbers to hit!!  ( Like millions of other people!!)

    Since I am retired now and an eccentric artist now days….I just prefer owning what I like.  There are a couple of watches I do have sights on…and once I get to where I am selling my art work on a more regular basis…I am sure I’ll find something to blow my money on….right now…I am using it to purchase more art supplies.

  • Tim Siragusa

    Still want one. Despite the pimple and despite the fact I have a 116400 and 16600

  • captaina16

    When i retired 15 years ago I financed a GMT with a black bezel to reward myself and to satisfy my Rolex lust. In the year 2000 with a 10% discount from my local jeweler the price was $4400 plus tax. The same watch according to the article now is close to $8400. I kept the watch for about one year and surprised my son by giving it to him. He keeps it in pristine condition. Looks new and loves it. I found that the watch functioned perfectly but gave me very little pleasure. I could not peer into it and see the “engine” function, where for me the fascination lies. The quality was there but perhaps the watch watch lust never is totally satisfied. 
       I think the blue black bezel looks OK but for me more color would be required for me to be tempted and even if tempted I don’t know if any on one would finance a “crippled old coot” with no upward financial future ahead for the purchase. I think the watch could be a good an enjoyable investment for the upwardly mobile person who could afford a new toy.

  • AK74

    This watch looks much better in reality than on pictures.

  • thornwood36

    ocabj thornwood36
    Firstly , that’s spooky how my earlier comment showed. when i typed it it didn’t show for some time and assumed wrongly that my comment wasn’t picked up.. Ocabj if i had the option on having a Monday watch and a Tuesday watch and…….well, you get the point i would go for something like the Zenith El Primero recently reviewed around the 7k mark. Little window into the workings so i can watch gaze.

  • spiceballs

    SuperStrapper  I like Rolex and I like the Batman/Bruiser but I do think that its time that Rolex considered some upgrades such as the handset you mentioned, the indices, the bezel (shape &(serrations) sapphire back, dial color and offer with/without the Cyclops.  Their history, movement, stainless steel, strap, these new features with their mostly reasonable pricing I believe would put them in an even stronger market position than they already are.

  • Robin Henry

    captaina16 I bought a Rolex Submariner in the mid-Sixties, but unfortunately had to sell it a year or two later to pay for car maintenance. My parents bought me an Omega Speedmaster Professional for my 21st in 1969, but that’s passed into history also.
    Watches are a bit like women … after a while, you get sick of them and yearn for something different, new, shiny and attractive. Lust of any type is only suppressed for a short while. 
    Lust for watches is probably less expensive in the long run.

  • MarcusMak

    I always find ROLEX a boring breed. Other than their subtle improvement cosmetically or internally over years. They literally bring very little exciting innovation to the watch industry. When i was out looking for my 3rd watch, i’d went straight to Blancpain Fifty Fathoms. It’s cost me more, but the joy is indescribable,

  • MarcusMak

    NVJim If you google, you will find instructions on how to remove the cyclops either by acetone & a sharp knife’s edge.

  • Patrick Kansa Chaz_Hen ocabj Ah so. Did not watch it… Thx!

  • Robin Henry

    MarcusMak The Blancpain Fifty Fathoms has had some excellent reviews and is refreshingly different from many other divers, but like Rolex, a bit expensive.

  • Fraser Petrick

    The (pathetic) inverse snob in me has always pretended I wouldn’t be caught dead in a Rolex – so real estate salesman trying to impress, so ‘hey-look-at-me’, so statusy,…
    Dammit! I want a Rolex. Thanks Kenny, thanks a lot.

  • captaina16

    Robin Henry captaina16 My friend watches are not like women, I have the same a original beautiful wife of 45 years. I am truly blessed.

  • wstephens1

    Love it i have it

  • iamcalledryan

    It all comes down to personal taste. I am in no hurry to own the watches you listed and I know plenty about both brands/models. I have a meistersinger and an omega higher up on my list than the batman, but the batman is a beauty in my opinion, regardless of it’s brand.
    I find it odd that people assume Rolex’s are bought to impress. Being as popular as they are yes I am sure they are sported by more than a few chumps, but why project that onto the brand? I really don’t see your 60 boob job analogy. Watches arenot like that. You can either adapt your models to annual trends or you can build an iconic model and make very small changes. With the latter approach a few years pass and suddenly the 60 yr old is 25 again.

  • iamcalledryan

    They innovate in materials, not really in design. But innovation is just one metric by which you should judge a brand.
    I absolutely love the innovators, the avant guarde, but I also like those that get it right and stick to their heritage.

  • bichondaddy

    iamcalledryan Again…it’s just my personal taste…..more than likely my opinion of Rolex was a matter of being forced to purchase and wear one for several years.  It left a bad taste in my mouth for the brand.  I can appreciate that people like and enjoy their personal Rolex…heck…some of my wife’s co-workers own them and that’s great.  I admire them…..but they aren’t for me.  My likes have changed over the years…and now that I am not in the working world anymore….I prefer to wear something that fits my personality.   Like others know on here…I am a really big guy….almost 2 meters tall….I am 6’6″….and played college football as an offensive lineman… I am not small.  My wife will tell you that my personality is as large as I am…and I have strong opinions on almost every thing.  Just so happens…I have a really strong opinion about Rolex.  

    I will say this…I told my wife that if she ever decides to drop nearly $50 grand on a watch for me…I wouldn’t mind having the all gold Rolex Sky Dweller.  The movement is so unique…I could get over my disdain for Rolex!

  • bichondaddy iamcalledryan I personally think the Sky Dweller is an amazing watch. Not a fan of the old school fluted bezel but I understand it is part of the iconic Rolex DNA and when you realize it’s part of the functioning of the watch, it’s pretty cool.

  • Patrick Kansa thornwood36 Maybe, but I cannot get past how unaesthetic it is.  Kind of like this:

  • Chaz_Hen bichondaddy iamcalledryan Those flutes can’t take much damage without it becoming sorely evident.

  • BGPT23 bowlclogger Thee seconds a day is an error of just 0.004%.  That’s not bad at all for a mechanical machine subject to vibrations and temperature variations.  Assuming a 4Hz escapement, it missed a couple of dozen beats out of almost 700,000 in a day.  

    Though not a fan of most Rolex designs, I’d be glad to relieve your suffering from owning one for free.

  • Twinbarrel

    I love mine. Every time I look at it it’s really that blue that adds that mystique. I don’t care too much how they really had a hard time making that blue/black bezel but I just simply love it. And I’m so happy they didn’t make it in white gold like its more expensive black/red brother.

  • MarcusMak

    Robin Henry MarcusMak Hehehe…a bit expensive is a little understated. :p  I’d got my FF w/X71 steel bracelet. Cost me more to obtain against the sail cloth strap variant, but it’s a little rare in Singapore. So i might as well, be a different totally. The extra cost on the FF is totally worth it in my personal’s capacity, (ofcoz at that price point, i could get many options(no rolex)) The FF decked w/1315 twin spring barrels, a large case but subtly looking in general is what’s i looking for. Plus the acquisition of an oldest watchmaker has plenty of story to tell (i aware Biver brought Blancpain as name & rebuild it) made me go for it. No regret, too many Rolex in SG, i dun wanna be like them. Boring & Souless. ;D

  • MarcusMak

    NVJim MarcusMak i hate the cyclop too, but i’ll never buy modern Rolex despite i have great respect for their capability & heritage. A friend did offered to sell me his GMT-2 @very good price, after much thought. It’s not a working for it, else i’ll share my success story w/U. haha

  • hegazy_nesrin
  • watch39

    Its a TAG,,,,,but I’ll take IT>>>>

  • theDWC

    You gotta love the comments anytime a Rolex article comes out.  The comments are usually by chumps with a bias based
    on price and often the inability to afford the item.  Like anything else, you either like Rolex or you don’t.  I never understood all the negativity and hate , especially over a watch.  It’s pretty shallow and pathetic, but kind of funny in a way.  Rolex must be doing something right though, since it’s one of the few watches that actually appreciates in value.  You can’t say that about a 52mm Invicta.

  • wstephens1

    Love the invictas. Large, Cheap and in charge

  • theDWC I also find it interesting that a lot of people start off a sentence with “I’m not a Rolex guy…”

  • theDWC  If there’s a shallow and pathetic comment here, it this:  “The comments are usually by chumps with a bias based on price and often the inability to afford the item.”

  • I’d hate to be caught dead wearing a Rolex.  They remind me of the 50s… wait, they have been the same since then or before!  But the worst ones are those recalling the 70s; there was nothing good about the 70s.  And, no, classic design predates those decades.

  • stefanv

    bichondaddy iamcalledryan I’ve gotta say, I’m curious how you were forced to purchase and wear a Rolex.

  • stefanv

    thornwood36 I don’t _like_ the cyclops either, but a few weeks ago, I got to look at some Rolexes in an airport shop, and I’ve got to say, that cyclops makes the date actually legible. If you’re under 40, that may be a non-issue (certainly was for me), but now at 50, I need +2.0 reading glasses to read a non-cyclops date. I guess it just goes to show that Rolexes are for old guys. 🙂

  • bichondaddy

    stefanv   It’s a long story…but to shorten it to a reasonable length….I was working for a Computer Retailer….corporate sales….and when I was hired…besides the normal paper work and company policies was a 50 page dress code manual.  It dictated almost every thing we were allowed to wear to work….including our watch.  I ended up going to a pawn shop and swapped some of my coin collection for a lightly used Rolex Sub that met company dress code.  I grew to absolutely hate the watch…and would take it off the instant I was off the clock.  At the time I owned a Rolex Explorer II….which I could not wear to work….although it didn’t matter since it spent more time being repaired than it ever did on my arm.  
    When I found a job more to my liking a few years later….I ended selling it to one of my fellow workers for probably 1/3 of what it was worth…but I really didn’t care.  To this day…I do not like nor do I own a watch of any brand that looks like a Rolex Sub with a black dial and bezel with white numerals.   Oh…the Explorer.II…I put it in it’s box in 1992 and never wore it again…since the movement had stopped working once again.  and it was stolen from our townhouse in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina…along with every other watch I owned at the time…except for the one I had on my wrist!

  • stefanv

    bichondaddy stefanv Wow! I’m glad I don’t work at a place like that. Strange that their dress code would specify a Rolex. If _all_ the sales reps from a company that was trying to sell to me were wearing Rolexes or other expensive watches, I’d think that they’re probably charging me too much. (If it were just one rep with a Rolex, I’d think he was just very good at his job.)

  • bichondaddy

    stefanv  Well…it was the 1980’s when this happened….and I doubt today a company could get away with dictating what type of watch you had to wear….that was if you chose to wear one.  They did not ask us to buy one from any particular vendor….so like I said…I went to a Pawn Shop and did a bit of trading for mine.  Plus…unlike today…where you have a smart phone to keep track of all of your appointments and all that sort of stuff, I had a “Daytimer” where I kept all my appointments…and a watch was pretty much a necessity.  I was really quite successful at that time…..I really loved what I did.  Only problem was the computer business at that time was booming and changing so much… led to a lot of sales and tech support people getting burned out.  I ended up in Software & Hardware Support for Apple products….and I was on call for several large accounts basically 24-7.  I spent many nights on site dealing with customer problems.

  • stefanv

    bichondaddy stefanv Interesting times. I was finishing University and starting work (software development) and recall well the rapid changes taking place. Thanks for sharing your story!

  • KennyYeo

    bowlclogger Mine loses around 2-3 seconds a day. Not fantastic and I would rather it run faster, but yeah, within COSC specs so I guess I can’t complain.

  • JoeHahn

    MarcusMak Robin Henry Rolex watches are like classic cars (Porsche 911). Sure, there might be bigger and faster out there but it will always be a timeless classic. Boring & Soulless? Some of the greatest watch collectors in the world will always have a Rolex in their collection.

  • frustin

    I tried one on at the weekend, they only had the black bezel.  I love it. The blue/black is starting to have a hold over me that the Panerai PAM000233 has.

  • frustin

    thornwood36 ocabj Something like this you mean:

    It’s lovely that.

  • Scot Armour

    The batman Rolex,is no doubt beautiful.The price is to high,probably only cost Rolex 3-4 grand to make it.Rolex prices used to be more reasonable back in the day,middle class could afford one.Now days,basicly for the rich.$9000 for the Batman GMT.ouch.

    • If it costs then $3-4k to make it, then the price seems reasonable. Mark up on most products falls into that percentage, if not worse. And from what I’ve read, they can’t keep these in stock. Based on that, it’s probably too inexpensive. I wish they were cheaper too, but the market is the market.

    • Jason Mirabello

      I’m sure it cost Rolex alot less than 3 or 4 grand to make this watch.. Probably closer to 700- 800 bucks.. These are mass produced…. This watch, while very nice is drastically overpriced..

  • littlebuddy12345

    I purchased this a few months ago. I still don’t see why all the hype over this watch. I do like it! I think I’m just not seeing it. I think it’s me. I read and have spoken to people who just love the piece. My wife who knows nothing about watches, fell in love with it. So, I got it!!
    But I still like my, Hulk more. But the Hulk seems to be a very love it, hate it watch? A lot of hate. I sorta think it’s me.
    But as for price? If they are able to sell it for MSRP (what I paid), then it isn’t overpriced, yet. I think the deep blue deepsea is going to see a declined from it’s over MSRP selling price, but I could be wrong. Nice watch though!! I’m glad I purchased it.