Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Chris Hall's avatar

Oh dear. I confess I rushed my assessment of the Dynapulse, being both drained from the week itself and more eager to a) make fun of the name and b) muse on the L-D’s place in Rolex brand strategy. Thanks for the very fair rebuke! I also fondly remember the IWC propeller and the possible threat it posed to the likes of Ewan McGregor.

Expand full comment
Rip Roach's avatar

A.J. Leibling musta been thinking about me when he wrote that--in some sense, if you have oceans of money, finding "the best" of anything and paying for it isn't all that hard. Even if you personally don't have any taste or knowledge, well, just pay someone who does. Or go out and buy the most expensive version of whatever it is you seek; even if it isn't THE very best, it's probably close to it. But at this point in my life I prefer a different approach, albeit one driven heavily by the fact that my finances are closer to puddles than oceans: I like to try to find the best things I can at much lower prices. Hondas and Toyotas--marvelous! Tissot PRX--fabulous! Oris--yeah! Citizen Attesa--love it!

Having just a month or so ago had a less-than-pleasant experience with a brand-new watch with a Hi-Beat movement, a movement that's been around for not quite five years, my personal reaction to the new Dynapulse movement would be--if I were in the market for a Rolex, any Rolex--wait and see. How thoroughly has Rolex been able to test it under real-world conditions? How well will it work after being worn for two or three years? It appears to be a marvel of ingenuity and creativity, to be sure--but, well, I wouldn't be an early adopter.

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts