Great Rolex Experiment With The GMT-Master II Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Crown
by GaryG
The last time I wrote here on Quill & Pad about my relationship with the world’s greatest mass luxury brand was last year when I explained Why I’ve Never Owned a Rolex – And Why I Might Yet.
Well, to know me is to know that if I say I “might yet” buy something it’s likely only a matter of time before I’ve talked myself into its absolute necessity as part of my collection.
So, too, with Rolex: in this case one of the watches that I mentioned last year as being on my short list, the GMT Master II BLNR “Batman” with black-and-blue bezel.
The author’s Rolex GMT Master II BLNR “Batman”
How it fits
In the “Terry Taxonomy” that our group of collectors applies to our holdings, for me the GMT Master is a “fun” watch: one that scratches an itch at a particular point in time and that is affordable enough that it doesn’t cause sleepless nights once purchased.
In last year’s article I even suggested that buying one could be viewed as a (relatively) “low-cost experiment.”
At the same time, it seems pretty clear that this could be an “investment” piece for me: a watch that sustains a fairly predictable value and that, more importantly, can act as a core piece within a collection.
Rolex GMT Master II BLNR
Potential experiment result: success
So what suggests that this could be a keeper for me?
It took me a while to come up with the right term, but for some reason what came to mind was “highly evolved,” which is a friend’s description of the form-fitting, perspiration-wicking bicycle clothes we wear on our rides.
While they are pretty clearly poorly suited to many uses (and in my wife’s view, “flatter no one”) they are darned good for covering miles on the bike.
The GMT Master II is more versatile than that, but at the same time seems to me to be the product of many years’ work to achieve a small number of goals at a desired price level with excellence. These include an attractive appearance on the wrist, robustness, and reliable timekeeping.
[pullquote align=”full” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]The Rolex GMT Master II is the product of many years’ work to achieve a small number of goals at a desired price level with excellence, including an attractive appearance, robustness, and reliable timekeeping.[/pullquote]
Attractive and robust: Rolex GMT Master II BLNR
On the first point: if you search online for images using the prompt “Rolex GMT Master II” as I did, what you’ll see is that exactly one of the first 200 images popping up shows the back side of the watch.
While it’s not too surprising that for any watch that there are more shots of the front than the back, by comparison nine of the first 100 image search results for “Patek Philippe Nautilus” show the reverse side.
My own experience is that the time that I spend considering the view of the back of the Batman is pretty much zero. And that’s just fine because Rolex has incorporated so many features that make the on-wrist view appealing, from the sharp edges of the crown to the platinum-plated recessed numerals in the bezel and the matching blue colors of the striking Cerachrom bezel and home-time hand.
Perfectly machined crown of the Rolex GMT Master II BLNR
When you pull up your sleeve to see the time, this watch looks good! The blue/black color motif works, the time is clearly legible, the central sweep seconds hand gives a pleasant sense of the orderly passage of time, and the anti-reflective coating does its job with distinction.
The concept of purposeful evolution extends to the mechanics as well. The mid-2000s Caliber 3186 movement builds on the Caliber 3185 introduced twenty years earlier by adding a more temperature- and magnetism-insensitive Parachrom hairspring. And it more effectively isolates the adjustable local time hour hand from the fixed home time indicator.
[pullquote align=”full” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]When you pull up your sleeve to see the time, this watch looks good![/pullquote]
Huge changes? Perhaps not. But they are evidence of the spirit of ongoing improvement, as is the Easylink feature of the upgraded buckle that allows the bracelet to be lengthened or shortened by five millimeters in a few seconds
Easylink clasp of the Rolex GMT Master II Oyster Bracelet
I think that most of the functional design choices made by Rolex make great sense. For instance, the movement hacks when you set the main time indications so that you can synchronize these to a reference, but does not hack when you adjust the hour indication of local time, the better to maintain that synchronization.
And in terms of being presentable, a steel Rolex is hard to beat. Many of my business clients wear similar pieces; and when visiting my longstanding global energy industry client, the “Texas Timex” is almost a part of the executive uniform.
Simple and presentable: Rolex GMT Master II
Potential experiment result: failure
While I think of myself as a buy-and-hold collector, I do sell from time to time. Over the past several years, I’ve worked pretty diligently to curate my collection by selling pieces I don’t absolutely love, converting the sale of several small pieces into the purchase of a smaller number of more important ones and eliminating overlaps.
If my GMT Master II ultimately goes to a new home, it’s most likely that it will be during a cycle of selling-to-buy in which I find something new that I just must have and in the interests of fiscal sanity decide I need to consolidate some other pieces to raise funds.
Short of that, there are a few things that may cool my ardor.
The Goldilocks Syndrome: Put simply, as a Rolex this watch may be too conspicuous for its level of distinction and not special enough to justify the attention it draws. To fly below the radar and still smile each time I slide my watch out from under my sleeve, I may be better off wearing my Vacheron Constantin Overseas, which is a more sophisticated, more expensive watch that draws less notice from the envious and larcenous.
Rolex Batman vs. Vacheron Constantin Overseas: one, both, or neither?
Industrial excellence: I really do deeply admire how fine a watch Rolex is able to make with what is clearly a highly automated, industrial production model. But over time, I may find that the implications of that model, such as the slab-sided, sharp-edged, flat-backed case design, start to wear on me.
Rolex GMT Master II: too hot, too cold, or just right?
Fortress mentality: It’s no secret – Rolexes are desirable enough that there are many people in the world looking to cash in by counterfeiting the Rolex look. Rolex fights this in many ways, including randomizing serial numbers; engraving both the serial number and “Rolex” notations on the flange; hiding secret signatures elsewhere; and I’m sure in other ways that are not clearly evident to the observer.
That’s all great, but will it start to bug me that many of the visual elements I see when I look at my watch are there for the purpose of fraud prevention?
Parting thoughts
At the end of the day, I suspect that this “experiment” will end with the GMT Master II as part of my regular wearing rotation – and perhaps as a long-term go-to piece.
Exercise in coherence: Rolex GMT Master II
One of my top criteria for a watch is coherence: does everything about the watch make sense in the context of the unified whole? And is the total package consistent with the brand’s personality and promise?
In this case my conclusion is yes. Part of the brilliance of this watch is that it omits all that it does not explicitly include, and what it includes it does so without apology.
Don’t like the raised “Cyclops” lens on the crystal, prominent hour markers, or stamped hands? Buy something else.
[pullquote align=”full” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]Part of the brilliance of this watch is that it omits all that it does not explicitly include, and what it includes it does so without apology.[/pullquote]
Dial detail: date indication seen through the Cyclops lens on the Rolex GMT Master II
Yes, I have some quibbles. I find it hard to believe that in this day and age there is such a thing as a calendar watch without a dedicated quickset date mechanism – the GMT Master requires the user to spin the travel time hand forward or backward through entire days to change the date.
While I’m at it, I should note that finding the right crown positions for winding, setting home time, and adjusting travel time is more challenging than it should be for a travel watch.
And on my example at least, the timekeeping is consistent across positions but not within Rolex’s advertised plus-minus-two-seconds-per-day benchmark, at least according to my timing app.
Timing result for the author’s Rolex GMT Master II
Bottom line: am I becoming a Rolex guy?
In terms of pursuing additional Rolex watches for my collection or seeing Rolex as an aspirational brand, I’m not. But, at least for now, when it comes to the GMT Master II I’m feeling the love.
Parting shot: Rolex GMT Master II BLNR
For more information, please visit www.rolex.com/gmt-master-ii.
Quick Facts
Case: 904L stainless steel; 40 x 12.4 mm
Movement: automatic Caliber 3186 with 48-hour power reserve
Functions: hours, minutes, seconds; instantaneous date, 24-hour display, second time zone with independent rapid setting of the hour hand, stop-seconds for precise time-setting
Price: current retail price $8,950
Production years: 2013 onward (introduced at Baselworld 2013)
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
-
[…] me, the suggestion of staging a “Joker vs. Batman” battle with your Rolex GMT-Master II Batman BLNR sends you running to the light […]
-
[…] This article was first published on April 19, 2016 at Great Rolex Experiment With The GMT Master II Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Crown. […]
-
[…] Update May 19, 2016: I did take the plunge and you can read all about that at Great Rolex Experiment With The GMT Master II Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Crown. […]
-
[…] vintage watches (see A Contemporary Watch Collector Goes Vintage), purchased my first Rolex (see Great Rolex Experiment With the GMT Master II Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Crown), and mused in print here at Quill & Pad about the value of rarity (see The Value Of Rarity: […]
-
[…] stainless steel GMT-Master II with a ceramic bi-color bezel offered by Rolex. It’s the very popular ref. 116710BLNR, also known as the “Batman” for its blue and black colorway. While it’s one of […]
-
[…] crown replacing the previous Twinlock crown. Internally, the GMT-Master II 116710LN is driven by the Rolex Caliber 3186 automatic mechanical movement with a power reserve of 48 hours. The caliber’s blue Parachrom hairspring lends greater […]
-
[…] Great Rolex Experiment With The GMT Master II Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Crown […]
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!
Fair review. Thanks for sharing your experience.
Appreciate your taking time to comment, Gabe! Thanks for weighing in.
Best,
Gary
Firstly, congrats on this beautiful piece, great that you’ve found peace in owning the crown.
However, I must say I’m a little disappointed that a fellow “mainstream-disliker” (hater seems to be too strong a word) would fall head-over-heels in love with probably the most mainstream piece in the current collection, albeit being the most beautiful piece in the sports collection.
I understand it’s a personal choice & opinion, but I think only the Cellini is worth a mainstream-disliker’s time. It is evil and mean, or even childish, for me to say this, but I do hope that you’d, over time, see way too many of the same pieces out there to reconsider your sentiments on this piece.
Please come back to the camp!!
CM —
“Come back to the camp” — love it! Still smiling days later at your request and articulate expression.
That said, I’m a big believer in taking a portfolio view of one’s collection, and within that model there’s absolutely room in my assortment for several JLC pieces and an Omega, for instance, along with the Rolex. The concentration of value is certainly with independent pieces, to be sure. At the same time, I suspect that over time I’ll swing my portfolio structure toward and away from bigger brands and more “popular” pieces as it pleases me.
To paraphrase the words of one major brand, knowing the rules allows one to break the rules (or even change them) from time to time!
Best,
Gary
Hi Gary,
Nice and honest review that you made here!
I am a (modest) collector and for a long long time, I didn’t dare to buy a Rolex because of the “negative” image it conveys, at least from the part of people who only know “the name for the name”… I also hate to get out and see Rolexes everywhere, worn by people who don’t know nor appreciate the product itself.
Along my collector path, I started to understand what the competitors are doing and how, and I started to understand that a Rolex watch is not only a name. It is a great watch, made by people putting an unequalled time, energy and devotion to perfection at everything they do. And the best thing is that nobody really get up to which standards they go because they don’t communicate on that !
Their products of course can be appealing to some and not to others, but they have to be respected for what they do. For that type of products, at that price point, I see few competitors in the same league, and to answer Tom Tx comment below, it will take decades for Chinese or any industry to come to this level.
So I guess you are right! Rules are here to be challenged!
Thanks for your thoughtful comments! I completely agree that for many people, the negative associations they make with the Rolex brand may be leading them to overlook the really solid job that Rolex does in making watches!
Best, Gary
Who takes better watch pics than GaryG?
Hey, Larry,
Now I’m blushing! Thanks so much for the kind words and for dropping a note here — seems an eternity since I’ve seen you and I’ll hope to remedy that situation soon.
Best, Gary
I hesitate to admit it, but I’m a closet Batman-lover. It is a “go to” watch, especially suited for travel and with versatility, including withstanding swimming pools. What I especially like, aside from legibility is its relative thinness, making it very comfortable to wear and I often use the quick-adjustment on the buckle. Just a nice basic watch, well done, and an accurate timekeeper. And –what is worthy of much more discussion– a really well-executed in-house movement.
Michael —
Great to have you comment here, as always — and I, for one, will in no way criticize your (formerly) hidden love for the Batman!
I agree with you that once you strip away the Rolex mystique you’re left, in this case, with a very solid watch that delivers on its promises — with a proven, robust movement — and that ain’t hay.
Best, Gary
That timer says it’s almost four seconds a day slow. NOT within the new -2 seconds to +2 seconds allowable under the new standards. What it is doing, to its credit, is performing within COSC standards like it should, which are −4/+6. Also to Rolex credit, the hype of a “superlative chronometer” actually finally means something thanks to their new standard testing as they are indeed certified to a level beyond the standard chronometer.
A watch between the Vacheron and the Rolex would be the ideal everyday high quality watch.
Don —
Thanks for commenting. Yes, something in between would be great — I still haven’t found the “perfect” watch, but it sure is fun trying to locate it!
Best, Gary
I’m not sure where “laser cut crown” comes from; I’m pretty sure they’re either stamped or machined (laser cutting is generally reserved for flat things).
Also, the +/-2 seconds/day is the average of the timing in 5 positions at full wind, (excluding crown left, dial facing you). See what that totals to 🙂
T
Tom —
You are correct on your first point! Classic Rolex newbie mistake — I was researching possible reasons for the crispness of the edges I observed on the winding crown and found references to the “laser etched crown” on these watches. As you likely know (and I do now) that refers to the security etching of an actual “crown” image on the crystal at 6 o’clock. We’ll fix the text — thanks for the catch. I’d still like to know how they cut that winding crown, though, as it looks and feels great!
As for the timekeeping, you may have missed in the article that I mention the timekeeping is “consistent across positions.” I did indeed measure in all positions, and found consistent results between -3 and -4. Of course, my measurements with an iPhone app are not meant to be authoritative — just my observations! I was, however, thorough in my work.
Thanks for taking time to comment!
Best,
Gary
Awesome Rolex GMT Master II 🙂 thank you for sharing your experience.
Thanks for taking the time to comment, Jorge, and for the kind words! Motivates me a lot to know that you and others enjoy my work here.
Best, Gary
I was thinking about Gary’s comment about quality of Rolex in their highly industrialized process. I would expect near perfection as a result of, not despite it.
The concern is that process can be copied & improved upon – creating a new generation of players. Just look at the US watch industry in the late 1800’s. The Swiss were beside themselves at the Phila Exposition of 1876. The consistency, quality, & volume of production from companies such as Waltham, Springfield, Ingersol, Benrus, Gruen, was astounding for the time.
It was however something the Swiss were able to copy and then improve upon over time.
So what was a strength 140 years ago became the down fall of a great American industry. Now those great American companies even the industry, are just a footnote in time.
And now in turn, the Swiss are looking over their collective shoulders at China, though I would have thought that Japan (Seiko Credor) is closer in terms of quality.
Good points, Tom — for Rolex the trick may be to continue the steady drip of continuous improvement that makes their products that bit better to the eye and on the wrist. That said, the large number of anti-counterfitting safeguards on contemporary Rolex pieces suggests that the chasing herd is closer than might be hoped…
Best, Gary
Seiko would be a logical contender with its one-two punch of quality & extreme pride in workmanship. I’ll bet most of their work is done by similar machines, yet the impression is all the craftsmen touching the watch are extremely proud of their quest to make the most precise & best finished watches in the world. I believe that since now all watch co.s can buy technology, they will need to get out of their comfort zone, lose the attitude, and focus on doing everything well – for the customer (not the company). Ironically, the market will reward them too.
Tom