Two-tone watches have never been a look I’ve found attractive. They remind me of cheap gold-plated watches you find at the mall for twenty bucks (with inflation, they are now $49.99). They carry the weight of countless wearers who are either stock market criminals or hairy and obese arms dealers who wear speedos while sunbathing on their yachts in Monaco – that was life in my 20’s, I thought I had left that behind.
Popular culture makes it challenging to think of two-tone watches on anyone other than mobsters, rappers, and used car salespeople. I aspire to be none of these. Beyond this, they have always struck me as the mullets of the watch world; unsure if they want to be used for business or partying, and almost always look confused, lost, and dated. I have never really given them a second glance until recently. Straight-laced, stainless-steel sports watches have become rather boring, as there are only so many times I can read about the Royal Oak or Nautilus.
So, when I had the opportunity to try a two-tone Rolex Daytona, I was intrigued by what it could offer, even if I was not too keen on the entire premise of two-tone watches. My first impression of this two-tone Daytona was not good. When Kara, the fantastic watch salesperson at Hal Davis Jewelers in Boise, handed it to me, I became concerned. It was so beautiful and shiny. I was disgusted with myself for liking it. I mean – “the mullet of the watch world”. Come on.
And, what is worse, if I picked it up I would be another lame white guy wearing a blingy watch, one that carries a close to $20,000 price tag; I knew I would have to partition my soul to take this home. Would it be worth it?
However, this was a unique position to be in. The Daytona was never a watch I cared much about, other than from the watchmaking side of its design and construction. It is a watch that is notoriously difficult to get and suffers from a nauseating amount of hype. Add to this the many negative experiences I have had with Daytona owners (many of whom were arms dealers, drug runners, or human traffickers), and it was difficult to not associate the Daytona with the worst of the watch owning community.
This isn’t to say the Daytona isn’t a very good watch. It is superb in its function and performance. It is technically superior to other chronographs in many ways. Beyond its time-keeping accuracy (mine has not gained or lost a second in five days), it is easy to wear, thin for a chronograph, and built like a gold and steel bling tank. I love that it is water-resistant to 100 meters. The oyster bracelet is nothing if not superbly comfortable, easy to adjust, and handsome. It is the second watch I own with the Easylink extension system on the clasp, and it is wonderful to have when my wrist swells while I am exercising. The polished gold center links take some getting used to, but they detract nothing from the function of the watch. I have found, though, that they do attract the attention of bros when I am in the grocery store.
The case is the oyster case, made famous by Rolex. It is sculpted well, polished beautifully, and sits on my wrist securely. The lug-to-lug distance of 46.36mm seems optimal as the watch does not overhang my wrist.
At 12.48mm thick, it isn’t the thinnest chronograph, but it is thin enough to not get in the way. It slips easily under all of my different gloves and sleeves, from winter jackets to dress shirts.
The 40mm diameter of the case is perfect. The tachymeter bezel is something I have not used, and will most likely never use – my car tells me how fast I’m going. I use the chronograph frequently to time ascents, descents, overall hike times, adventures, and cooking the occasional egg. The buttons are easy to push and water-tight. I feel confident when putting the watch in a muddy or wet environment. They click on and off with the same sound I imagine a bank vault makes when it shuts.
Quality is what this watch, and all other Rolex watches, does best. It never lets me down. Every piece is the result of ad nauseam engineering; every feature and functional part is incrementally designed and functionally refined. Rolex is the leader of this aspect of the watch game, and it is a game I am glad they take seriously. I wonder if Rolex’s watch designers, engineers, and makers are sad to see their watches not used harder by many people who buy them.
There is no question that this watch will work in many challenging situations, and I can’t see any reason to not wear it into Grand Canyon or the Frank Church Wilderness. It is not the traditional design of choice to wear when pretending to be a mid-20th century explorer, but at some point, we need to spread our creative wings a little.
There are a few things I do not like about this watch. The first is the hype. It is just a watch, after all. It will not make you or me a better more capable person if we own it. The second is its legibility. It isn’t impossible to read, but it isn’t as easy to read as other chronographs. This is where my IWC beats this Rolex handily. I never have to struggle to read any of the sub-dials on the IWC and it is easy to read at night. The Daytona’s sub-dials are difficult to read without searching. Reading the time takes some work as well, especially at night. The lume is useable, but the amount of lume which is applied to the hands and markers is small. I wish it had the Glidelock clasp. That would make it even more enjoyable to wear.
I have only been able to take it outside in the snow over the past week, but it seems it will thrive outside. The sun reflects off the gold, and the dial is beautiful in the light. It does not scratch easily, and it is light enough not to become uncomfortable when snowshoeing, especially with gloves and multiple jackets. It looks delicious when dirty, and I think it may be at its best when it is filthy. This cuts down on the bling, and it adds a dynamic to it that no amount of life in a safe can: charm and wisdom. As with people, hardships add interest and character and make them more exciting and engaging. The same goes for this watch. Some actual use sets it apart from the Teflon-coated crowd of safe-queens and shows it for what it can be: a bad-ass bling machine that can and should accompany a life lived outside to the fullest.
I love this watch, and I am not embarrassed to say so. The stainless-steel and ceramic version would be better in many cases, but this watch is not much of a sacrifice. I will wear it as often as possible and take it on every adventure imaginable. It looks surprisingly good paired with dirty Lowa boots, ripped hiking pants, and a sweat-stained shirt.
I realize now that my soul was overrated. I feel good about this decision. My new Speedos will be here on Tuesday. Full-frontal pictures to come.
EscapementSV 