Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 54 conversations about:
Hughs8
37
May 24, 2015
bookmark_border
That is one big rip off of the Rolex submariner
May 24, 2015
DeathWatch
380
May 25, 2015
bookmark_border
Hughs8Yeah they didn't bother to change the look at all,except the logo......I kinda don't want to purchase any Davosa now,it is astonishing for me that some Swiss brand would do this....I though only Chinese company would do this...
May 25, 2015
Justaway
133
May 25, 2015
bookmark_border
DeathWatchThere is demand for Submariner clones though. Even if the watch making companies didn't make them, watch buyers will mod their watches with custom bezels, hands and dials to look like them. There also might the factor that even if you haven't seen a Submariner before, this particular combination of indices, hands and bezel simply looks good.
May 25, 2015
DeathWatch
380
May 26, 2015
bookmark_border
JustawayFor me it is more about the Intellectual Property of Rolex,sure I know there isn't a patent on that look right now but a company shouldn't just copy other companies' design.
It is ok to do it on a personal level but if a company does that it is a different thing,if you copy someone else's design you really shouldn't make profit out of it(commercially).At least make a few more tweaks or something,not like this 95% Submariner look-alike watch.
With that said if you just want a homage watch it is not bad at this price,at least it has sapphire and ceramic like the real deal.
May 26, 2015
adam4163
43
May 26, 2015
bookmark_border
DeathWatchNice speedmaster bro. I love the Dark Side of the Moon ones.
May 26, 2015
DeathWatch
380
May 26, 2015
bookmark_border
adam4163Thanks,the new ones are coming this year I think.
May 26, 2015
Soundprank
101
May 26, 2015
bookmark_border
DeathWatchWell, to be fair, the first Rolex was a clear homage to the Fifty Fathoms. Sure the design has changed over time and has become something else entirely now.
Lots of companies make homages -- with or without very little regard to making changes to the overall appearance. There were rumors that Invicta was threatened with a lawsuit, but I think it's pretty fair to say that it never amounted to anything with so many homages out there. Hell, even the Steinhart mentioned earlier also makes a pretty close homage of the Rolex Submariner we know today. Honestly, I can't really blame any company doing it because of one thing and one thing only -- price.
At the end of the day people are gonna buy a watch as much for fashion as well as function, but will only do so within their means. I'd feel more comfortable outright buying a homage than buying a replica/clone for the sole reason that I'm not going to pretend that I can have or afford a Rolex right now, and I would never claim to own one unless I actually did.
May 26, 2015
Hughs8
37
May 27, 2015
bookmark_border
SoundprankYour completely right. i would way sooner buy an "homage" than a fake or replica watch. your lying to yourself and others by buying a fake.
May 27, 2015
GES11T
2508
May 29, 2015
bookmark_border
DeathWatchBecause they can... now, since Rolex didn't renew their patents for the sub-mariner.
May 29, 2015
WillVautrain
138
May 29, 2015
bookmark_border
GES11TThere is nothing about the appearance of the Submariner that was patented by Rolex. They created the first Submariner in 1953, and it used the water resistant Oyster case features that Rolex had already designed almost 30 years earlier. I disagree the Submariner was an homage to the Fifty Fathoms, it was clearly a superior design in regard to water resistance, and other than both dials featuring large luminescent markings for low-light readability, they are otherwise fairly dissimilar, and they came about at the same time (both launched in 1953).
Submariner homage watches have been around for years and years and years. Seiko makes them, Davosa, Timex, Invicta, etc. There is nothing wrong with an homage watch, only fakes that use the Rolex brand.
May 29, 2015
Soundprank
101
May 29, 2015
bookmark_border
WillVautrainI assure you, the original Rolex Submariner doesn't look ANYTHING like the Rolex submariner does now. It's definitely now something else entirely, but it was clearly a homage in it's initial production -- at least based on aesthetics. The Oyster technology though I would argue is something else entirely (as you mention, it came out almost 30 years prior).
You can clearly see that Rolex made a very close representation of the original Blancpain Fifty Fathoms by looking at their original models, both of which came out around 1953
Rolex Submariner (first model) http://www.ablogtowatch.com/first-rolex-submariner-watch/
Blancpain Fifty Fathoms (first model on pg. 5) http://people.timezone.com/jmerino/history50.pdf
May 29, 2015
starter
237
May 30, 2015
bookmark_border
SoundprankAny unbiased WIS will tell you the timeline simply doesn't support the theory that the Sub was a Fifty homage. Yes, the Fifty appeared at market first. But there is evidence the Submariner was in development before the Fifty. Which watch was truly first may never be known, with both companies claiming first and offering evidence to support those claims, but what is known is that we're talking about a matter of months, not years. Throwing out the technicalities, a reasonable statement is that the watches were released at the same time. Neither watchmaker was attempting to plagiarize the other... They couldn't if they'd tried. Retooling, production, and going to market in that short a time is impossible in 2015, let alone 1953. The watches share some aesthetic similarities because there were only a finite number of ways to produce a dive watch in the early 50s.
May 30, 2015
WillVautrain
138
May 31, 2015
bookmark_border
SoundprankThanks for the response, but I've been collecting Rolex, dive, military and other tool watches for more than 15 years. I know plenty about early Subs and their genesis and aesthetics. Edit: I don't mean to sound snippy, but if you consider the basic design of both the FF and the Sub dials was influenced heavily by Kampfschwimmer, Rolex-made Panerai dials, and Rolex art-deco "California" type dials all from the 10-20 years prior to the debut of both divers, it becomes apparent that calling either watch an homage to the other just doesn't make sense. If you consider the FF the first modern dive watch to hit the market, a case can probably be made for that, but in no way is the Rolex Sub an homage to the FF.
May 31, 2015
The_Linux_Crew
2
Oct 4, 2015
bookmark_border
DeathWatchRe: "For me it is more about the Intellectual Property of Rolex,sure I know there isn't a patent on that look right now but a company shouldn't just copy other companies' design."
The Rolex is a blatant copy of the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms. The Submariner was released a year or two after the Blancpain. That is why Rolex doesn't sue, because it isn't their design.
Oct 4, 2015
View Full Discussion