The Breitling Watch Source Forums
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/

Colt GMT vs Rolly GMT Master :?:
https://www.breitlingsource.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3511		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  A4B7 [ Fri Jun 13, 2008 8:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Colt GMT vs Rolly GMT Master :?:
It's not a 'which is better' or 'is the Rolex overpriced' question, but since the GMT Master or the Explorer ll cost twice as much I was wondering where can such a big difference be?

I have an Explorer ll and before that have owned a GMT Master for many years. Now visually comparing with my new Ling Colt GMT they look in the same league with a little edge on favor of the Colt in some small details.

Maybe the Rolex is THAT much better but I'm just bored of looking at it?
Author:  Jim3 [ Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:33 pm ]
Post subject:  "better"
What is your standard to define "better"?

Cheapest watch that will give you the time?
Author:  A4B7 [ Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "better"
Jim3 wrote:
What is your standard to define "better"?

Cheapest watch that will give you the time?


Maybe I'm not making the right question or I'm comparing apples and oranges... sorry for that.

I have different standards to define "better" depending on what we are talking about. Regarding watches it's hardly the accuracy of time keeping that inclines me to spend a buck more for a fine timepiece, but I guess we all know about that on these forums.

Bests
Author:  Driver8 [ Sat Jun 14, 2008 2:50 am ]
Post subject: 
I apologise for this response if you are a big Rolex fan, but a definite proportion of the additional cost of the Rolex is down to the little crown logo on the dial.

Rolex is perceived as being more desirable to the masses than Breitling so they charge more. This is much the same as Breitling is seen as more desirable than Seiko......

The rest of the difference is in the fact that Rolex make their own movements (which is an expensive business in R&D terms) and they use a slightly more expensive steel in their cases and bracelets - 904L as opposed to 316L.
Author:  A4B7 [ Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:14 am ]
Post subject: 
Interesting Driver8, Thank you.

I believe that the crown factor and them making their own movements must be where the big difference relies. The stainless steel is sold by the pound so I don't think that can influence the price that much.

Thanks for the good info
Author:  Breightbling [ Sat Jun 14, 2008 7:48 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
The stainless steel is sold by the pound so I don't think that can influence the price that much.


904L has very substantial contents of the high cost ingredients nickel and molybdenum, so 904L steel is about three times the price of 316L steel. The difference makes it highly resistive to corrosion, but unless you're diving in sulfuric acid the difference isn't really noticeable.

Also, 904L is a high purity, low sulfur grade, and as such will not machine well, as shown here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UuDJl93Z1g. That means they have to have special, and expensive, equipment.

Hope that helps.
Author:  Mikey H [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:48 am ]
Post subject: 
D8, A4, And BB hit the nail on the head. There are alot of factors that go into the price of a Rolex. Also, there is the fact that Rolex marketing has lead many to believe it is the ultimate in luxury. They command a higher price, because everyone knows the name. There are alot of people who choose Rolex as their first watch, because it will impress those without even a modicum of watch knowledge. They also are one of the few manufacturers that can produce close to a million watches a year, sell them all, and still have waiting lists two years out for some of their models. (S/S Daytonas, S/S Milgauss) And besides all that, someone has to pay for the $50 million a year marketing budget. :lol:
Author:  Jim3 [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:57 am ]
Post subject:  Rolex
I am impressed by Rolex.... Rolex the watch and Rolex the corporation.

Rolex has been doing a great job producing quality watches, in house movements, high grade stainless, 18K gold, etc... for decades.

There is more to Rolex than marketing.
Author:  Driver8 [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Rolex
Jim3 wrote:
There is more to Rolex than marketing.

Absolutely right - they are a colossus of the watch world, and undoubtedly the most successful prestige watch company EVER. They didn't get there purely by having fancy marketing.... but they also wouldn't have got there without it.

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate Rolex at all, and if they ever produced something that I really liked the look of I'd not hesistate to buy one again. But the 50th Anniversary LV Submariner I had disappointed me more than any watch I've ever owned, so I admit that my own view of them is a little skewed. I just find them more cynical than any other watch brand in terms of restriction of supply. (I speak from first hand experience unfortunately..... and it cost me money. :roll: )
Author:  Tat6272 [ Sat Oct 30, 2010 11:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Colt GMT vs Rolly GMT Master :?:
I know this is an old topic, but as an owner of both a Breitling Colt GMT and a Rolex Explorer ll, I thought I would add my 2 cents. I will not comment on the movements or the grade of stainless steel that's used in production. I will say that I find the Breitling to be a much more substantial watch. It seems like there's much more attention to detail paid to the Breitling. It is also seems to be built to withstand much more abuse. The rolex is far to light and almost feels cheap when handling the two side by side. After having owned Breitlings for years, I finally bought into the whole Rolex marketing thing and purchased the Explorer ll, I find myself totally unimpressed with Rolex. Besides that, the Rolex line-up has very little difference as far as aesthetics are concerned. Breitling has so much more to choose from and something for everyone.......again this is just my 2 cents.
Author:  Novacastrian [ Wed Nov 03, 2010 7:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Colt GMT vs Rolly GMT Master :?:
I love Rolex, but i one reason i really like Breitling (apart from design etc) is that here in Australia, most people have never heard of them. It means that my watches fly under the radar. Wear a Rolex and everyone notices. I'd rather be noticed for my sparkling personality :D
Author:  novedl [ Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Colt GMT vs Rolly GMT Master :?:
very impressive responses to the query at hand. it's great to see that this thread has not devolved into the typical "is it worth it?" thread.
i think that rolex makes a great product as does breitling but the lack of options rolex provides leaves me with a sense of the old henry ford addage of getting any color ford auto you like as long as it is black. imo there are too few distinctions across the models in the rolex sports range.
***this was posted by the owner of a silver dial colt gmt*** :wink:
Author:  F14D_Tomcat [ Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Colt GMT vs Rolly GMT Master :?:
With Rolex selling an average of 1 million pieces per year, and for such a long period in time, it's evident that it has become a well known brand recognized globally, good marketing policy or not.

That necessarily means that it is less exclusive than Breitling (except maybe for some particular pieces). Clearly I do not question Rolex quality here but this is the cold language of numbers. IMO, and except for the aviation community, who, among the general public, can instantly recognize a Breitling as they would a Rolex?
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/