My Collecting Journey: Rolex and the Oyster Perpetual

In recent months, when speaking with various watch enthusiast friends of mine, I noticed a couple of occasions that there has been perhaps a little surprise that some collectors have never owned a Rolex, or discussion around whether every watch collection should have at least one Rolex within it. This got me thinking, as I personally have never owned a Rolex, nor have I really had a desire to do so before.

Sure, I have tried many different Rolex watches when the opportunity has presented itself at various get togethers, watch meetups, or even in the occasional retailer. Submariners, Daytonas, SkyDwellers, Datejusts… you name it, and it has almost certainly been on my wrist at one point or another.

And yet, despite this, I have never really come away from the experience looking back and thinking to myself “I need to get one of those!”

I wondered whether if I were to spend some substantive time with a Rolex watch, whether it would serve to change my opinion on this at all. If I were to spend more time with a Rolex, might I be able to cultivate a more informed opinion than one crafted in a few minutes at a time? Might it lead me to feel like there should indeed be a Rolex in my own collection?

Should every watch collection have a Rolex?

For the most likelihood of success in terms of changing my opinion, the watch would need to be one which I would have the maximum chance of thinking I needed to get one – after all there’s no point in spending time with something I’m simply not going to like!

With my current tastes, and common characteristics of watches that I like, the new Oyster Perpetual 124300 in 41mm with a black dial is very much a strong candidate: it’s the right size for my 17cm wrist, and the black dial is more conservative than perhaps the red or yellow dials which suits my style. Also, having previously experienced a friend of mine’s (now discontinued) 39mm Oyster Perpetual rhodium dial 114300, I can safely say it was the Rolex which I have enjoyed wearing the most, perhaps alongside a Milgauss 116400GV (where the GV stands for Glace Verte for the green sapphire crystal, read more on that here).

I’m also not a big fan of the cyclops lens that Rolex apply over the date window, somewhat restricting the options!

Furthermore, in my opinion the Oyster Perpetual is fundamental to the DNA of what Rolex watches are at their core.

The Oyster Perpetual collection was completely revamped by Rolex at the beginning of 2020, catching the watch world off guard thanks to a series of colourful dials across the collection, reminiscent of the colourful lacquered Stella dials of the 1970s.

Before I talk about the time I spent with the Oyster Perpetual, let’s first take a quick look at its history.

The Oyster Perpetual Story

We can learn quite a lot simply by breaking down the name. ‘Oyster’ and ‘Perpetual’ both denote two key innovations from Rolex in the early Twentieth Century.

In 1926, Rolex produced the first waterproof and dustproof watch case, which for the first time introduced an air-tight case. This case was named ‘Oyster’. The claim of waterproofness was famously put to the test in a stroke of marketing genius from Rolex, when in 1927 the watch was worn by swimmer Mercedes Gleitze as she swam the English Channel. Her swim lasted over 10 hours, with the watch still working perfectly when she had finished.

It wasn’t until five years later in 1931 that the second innovation brought the term ‘Perpetual’ into the equation. One of the biggest issues with the Oyster case was not the case itself, but that to wind the movement inside, one would have to unscrew the crown (and thereby suspend the waterproofness) to wind it. Obviously, this isn’t something you would want to be doing at a point where the waterproofness was critical!

The solution to this was Rolex’s self-winding mechanism with a ‘Perpetual’ rotor, which was capable of automatically winding the movement so that no manual intervention was required – something we almost take for granted 90 years later. Even to this day, you will find the words ‘Oyster Perpetual’ on all Rolex watches except for the Cellini collection (which rated to only 50m water resistance whereas all others are rated to at least 100m), a testament to the significance of these innovations.

Rolex Oyster Perpetual watches predate the collections that we know today: for example, the Datejust first appeared in 1945, the Explorer in 1953, the Submariner in 1954, and the Day-Date in 1956. The Oyster Perpetual was worn during Sir Malcolm Campbell’s land speed record attempts with his Bluebell in 1935, worn when Captain Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier in the Bell X-1 aircraft, and worn by Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay when they summited Mount Everest in 1953.

In fact, the Oyster Perpetual worn by Hillary on this expedition served to inspire the first Rolex Professional collection, with the introduction of the Rolex Oyster Perpetual Explorer in 1953.

There is a lot more that can be said about the Rolex Oyster Perpetual, however hopefully with this whistle-stop overview helps contextualise just how incredibly important a part of Rolex’s history it is. Whilst the collection is both very much a refined aesthetic with a simple three-hand display, and the entry-point collection into the world of The Crown, it is certainly no compromise on quality or any less a watch.

In my mind, it represents a significant proportion of the brand’s DNA, and if there is a Rolex which I might decide is one I need to get, it’s the most likely candidate. Thus, it is perfect for further exploring my personal relationship with Rolex watches.

My Journey with the Oyster Perpetual 41mm 124300

In the current collection, there are 32 individual references, spanning five sizes (28mm, 31mm, 34mm, 36mm and 41mm) and different colour dials (black, silver, blue, turquoise, yellow, green, pink, and coral red) so there really is likely to be one to suit everyone’s individual tastes.

Having spent about a month with this watch (and experienced some of the others albeit briefly), objectively, it is a superb watch, and I can’t really fault it.

I’m not going to regurgitate the technical specifications here but suffice it to say that it is extremely comfortable on the wrist thanks to the Oyster bracelet and clasp, and the 41mm size is perfect for my wrist. The brushed steel bracelet and case look fantastic with the added benefits of hiding any minor scuffs or knocks that stick out like a sore thumb on a polished surface.

The dial is clear, legible (with fantastic lume) and most certainly handsome to look at. My only minor gripe might be the double batons at 3, 6 and 9 on the 41 and 36mm watches, but that’s me really nit-picking – I just prefer the layout with single batons (as it was on my friend’s rhodium dial 114300 and the Milgauss 16400GV).

Holding the watch, the inherent quality of the build of it is undeniable. It is waterproof to 100m, and inside the automatic 3230 movement with 70 hours power reserve performs to within ±2 seconds per day accuracy, comfortably outperforming most mechanical watches out there.

Simply put, this is the quality of the Crown, and my appreciation of this certainly grew over the month spent with the Oyster Perpetual.

I would describe the Oyster Perpetual as a perfect “go anywhere, do anything” type watch, especially with the more conservative black dial, where I suppose some of the bolder colour options might be less suitable in certain circumstances. In my opinion, it works as a dress watch, as a sports watch, and as an everyday wear. What more could you want?

Did the Oyster Perpetual change my mind on Rolex?

Despite all the above, if I am being honest with myself, I’m just not particularly excited by it. Now, I am not saying it isn’t a great watch because it absolutely is, and I have been trying to understand why the watch didn’t strike a chord with me. After all, everything about this watch should – on paper – very much tick my boxes.

After all my deliberating and trying to understand why I couldn’t bond with it, my overriding conclusion is that it is almost too good at what it does, in being that perfect watch for practically any occasion. To me, it’s like there is no metaphorical jeopardy for want of another phrase.

It’s a fantastic watch and everybody knows it. Even people who wouldn’t consider themselves watch enthusiasts would see it is a Rolex and understand instantly that this must be a great watch.

Other than perhaps some of the more colourful dials, they don’t seem to have that little bit of quirkiness that I have come to enjoy in watches – I do wonder if regardless of the quality of the watch, whether Rolex is too well known a brand to fit my personal tastes, where I would generally prefer more to ‘fly under the radar’.

Even having tried the most popular colourway in the Oyster Perpetual turquoise (which attracts an insane premium on the grey market), my main feeling coming away from having tried this on was that of being rather underwhelmed, which I thought was quite telling.

I want to own a watch that triggers an emotional response within me, and for whatever reason, I haven’t historically found that I seem to get that from Rolex watches. After spending a month with this Oyster Perpetual, that sadly hasn’t changed.

Don’t get me wrong, I totally appreciate that to many millions of people around the world Rolex does just that for a whole multitude of reasons, and given the quality of the watches this is deservedly so.

Rolex make watches of paramount quality which can be relied upon without so much as a second thought in practically any given circumstance. There is a reason that Rolex make, and sell, between 800,000 and 1,000,000 watches a year, with many current models incredibly difficult to acquire without paying a premium on the grey market. Not to mention the vibrant market for vintage Rolex watches that can be several decades old, and yet still happily tick away.

Since the introduction of this new generation of Oyster Perpetual, they too have proved insanely popular, to the point that they are essentially impossible to find available in a boutique or retailer there and then. At their list price they offer great value and so invariably demand will outweigh supply; collectors must then wait months, years, or reluctantly cough up and pay the premiums commanded for almost every single piece which is understandably a source of immense frustration.

Several friends of mine own and love their Rolex watches, and being able to vicariously share their love of their watches is something that I enjoy very much, and in itself gives me great joy to see. These watches resonate with millions around the world for many different reasons; I appreciate and respect that entirely, but, for the time being at least, I just can’t say the same about them for me.

In Summary

Taking the time to spend with the Oyster Perpetual, it was important to have an open mind as to whether my mind might change, and I believe I did. Whilst I hadn’t ever found myself wanting a Rolex or come away from having tried one thinking “I need to get myself one”, perhaps I just hadn’t tried the right watch yet. Or, maybe it was because I hadn’t spent the time needed to really get to appreciate and enjoy the watch as it should be.

It might even just not be the right time for me with Rolex, and maybe in the future I will think differently. After all, my friend’s rhodium dial Oyster Perpetual had certainly resonated with me.

However, sometimes the heart wants what the heart wants (or in this case, doesn’t want).

Rolex undoubtedly make watches of exceptional quality, and they are perhaps the ultimate tool watches, designed to perform to enacting standards in any given situation such that they can be relied upon without question. This is very much reflected in the watch market, where certain watches command (and achieve) exorbitant premiums, and the vast majority are frustratingly difficult to acquire for collectors.

So, should every watch collection have a Rolex? In my opinion, no. I don’t think collectors should purchase anything other than watches they want, and certainly not  watches from a particular brand – any brand for that matter – as a box-ticking exercise to own a watch from. If a watch doesn’t resonate with you to the point of wanting to own one, for any given reason, that is absolutely OK.

To finish, whilst my current views on Rolex remained the same even after spending the month with an Oyster Perpetual, what I would say that I have taken from this experience is that somebody who simply dismisses the objective quality of a Rolex, probably owes it to themselves to do a little more research – you don’t have to want, or desire something to be able to appreciate the inherent quality of what it is and what it does.

If you have any questions, or want to share your thoughts, please get in touch via our Contact page, or via our Instagram.

You might also be interested in:

• My Collecting Journey: Le Régulateur Louis Erard x Vianney Halter
• Spotlight: Rolex Milgauss Green Sapphire Crystal
• Watch Accuracy Standards
• Watch Stationery and Gift Ideas
• Watch Books, Watch Boxes and more at the Watch Affinity Shop on Amazon (commissions earned)

As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases – thank you for your support