We Asked 200 People to Rate Every Rolex—Here’s What Surprised Us

A few weeks ago, we asked you to rate every modern Rolex collection on a scale from 1 to 10. More specifically, we asked: "How would you rate the design of the Rolex [model] overall? Consider the shape, dial layout, proportions, and overall aesthetic — not just the color or metal shown." The survey featured only real photographs of current-production models—no renders.

We collected respondents' age, identification as a watch enthusiast/non-enthusiast, familiarity with Rolex, and open-ended responses —"Which Rolex model (or models) stood out to you most—positively or negatively? Why?" and "Any other thoughts on Rolex design?"

Unsurprisingly, most respondents were watch enthusiasts—readers of this blog, followers of our Instagram. But about 10% were non-enthusiasts, or self-described "not sure yet" types. The idea was simple: see how Rolex’s designs hold up across different groups of people: various age groups, levels of interest, familiarity, etc. 

Keeping the skewed sample sizes in mind, we see some interesting trends in the data— splits between what resonates with seasoned enthusiasts and what appeals to a broader, more casual audience.

This report is based on a survey of 179 self-described enthusiasts and 21 non-enthusiasts, who rated each modern Rolex model from 1 to 10. The analysis that follows is built on their data and their direct, unfiltered feedback.

The Big Three: Submariner, GMT-Master II, & Daytona

Rolex’s professional models, particularly those hardest to buy at retail, lead the pack in our survey. The top three rated watches were exactly what you'd expect.

— Submariner: 8.90 overall average

— GMT-Master II: 8.69 overall average

— Daytona: 8.49 overall average

For enthusiasts, these numbers were even higher. But the overall average hides a massive gap. The GMT-Master II, which enthusiasts scored at 8.98, received just a 5.71 from non-enthusiasts—the single biggest divide in the survey.

It should come as no surprise that the iconic GMT-Master II is a favorite amongst enthusiasts. It's a truly iconic watch design, a genuinely handy travel tool, and it's just plain cool (and has been for decades). Consciously or unconsciously, enthusiasts are seeing the king of GMTs when they look at the GMT-Master II, while casual observers are seeing an extra hand, a busy bezel, and competing colors. As one self-identified non-enthusiast respondent put it, “Did not like the one with blue and red.”

This "big three" divide is also quite noticeable across age groups. Among respondents 51 and older, the three watches averaged over a 9.0. For the 18-25 cohort, none of them broke a 7.0. It's possible that younger buyers aren't as sold on Rolex's mid-century sports icons, or at least their modern executions. 

Everest Curved-End Rubber Strap and Premier Tool Kit

Still, for many, the classics held strong appeal. “My personal favorites are the Daytona, Submariner, and GMT,” one respondent said. “They are at home at the beach or in the office."

The Land-Dweller: Rolex’s Most Divisive Watch in 2025

No model sparked a stronger negative reaction than the Land-Dweller. It earned the lowest score of any watch—an average rating of 5.97—and was mentioned by name in negative feedback more than any other model in the catalog.

In a notable inversion, non-enthusiasts actually rated it higher (6.53) than enthusiasts did (5.92). The qualitative feedback highlights a few reasons why. The name was a common target (“Land-Dweller name is lame and so is the watch”). But the more substantial critique was a perceived lack of Rolex identity. One comment captured the sentiment perfectly: “It seems unusual for Rolex to chase other brands’ style. This design looks similar to the Royal Oak or the Nautilus.”

The rejection was not uniform across the board. Much like the three models prior, the Land-Dweller was most harshly judged by the youngest respondents and viewed more forgivingly—though still poorly—by the oldest. Here are some more comments on the new Land-Dweller:

"The Land-Dweller watch face is just ugly to me," "The Land-Dweller is too busy and feels distracted," "Negatively: Land-Dweller...the dial is not to my taste," "The Land-Dweller is nothing more than a Datejust with a terrible bracelet."

The 1908: Quietly Winning Over New Fans

While the brand new Land-Dweller got the least love in our survey, the also-quite-new Perpetual 1908 emerged as an unlikely winner. The dress watch earned the highest score among non-enthusiasts (Non-enthusiast rating: 8.12) and created the largest "reverse gap" in the survey, with casuals rating it significantly higher than enthusiasts did (7.44).

The qualitative feedback helps explain why. One respondent put it simply: “The 1908 is simple and beautiful. I love the band and the delicate look of the numbers and pointers. Truly a timeless design.”

Others praised its restraint—“The Rolex 1908, I love the simplicity of it”—and its ability to stand apart from the other models: “The 1908 one is the only Rolex I’ve ever seen that’s made me think it is a cool brand.”

While many didn’t mention the 1908 at all, those who did generally saw it as a clean, elegant option that finally makes sense in the space where the Cellini never quite landed. Traditional "dress watches" are hardly what Rolex is known for these days, but the 1908 might be shifting that perception among less traditional buyers. 

Mass Appeal: Datejust and Day-Date Still Resonate

The Datejust and Day-Date performed well across both groups, with 8.26 and 8.33 averages, respectively. Consistent with the "big three", both scored lower amongst non-enthusiasts. Still, both models stayed safely above average in every demographic and age group.

Their appeal seems disconnected from function or history. Instead, they are understood as pure luxury objects. Words like “timeless” and “classic” dominated the open-ended feedback in regards to these models. "Day Date & 1908 - very classy." 

Understated Favorites: Explorer and Oyster Perpetual

The Explorer (7.54 overall) and OP (7.42 overall) didn’t lead the survey, but they scored consistently well across every group. The Explorer earned particular praise from enthusiasts for its clean proportions and tool-watch DNA. The OP did better with non-enthusiasts, thanks in part to its simple design and accessible vibe.

“I like the simplicity of the Air-King and Explorer and Oyster Perpetual,” one person wrote. “Not a fan of the fish eye date.” Another said, “The Explorer and the Air-King are beautiful and understated.”

Neither watch is flashy, and neither tries to be. For many respondents, especially those who didn’t mention specific models, these two quieter models were quietly near the top of their lists. 

Where the Ratings Dipped: Sky-Dweller, Air-King, Deepsea

At the bottom of the survey, alongside the Land-Dweller, were the Air-King (6.54 overall), Sky-Dweller (7.03 overall), and Deepsea (7.17 overall).

The Air-King (6.54 overall) was frequently described as “cluttered” and “awkward.” Strangely, most of the Sky-Dweller's 14 mentions were positive: "Sky-Dweller is fantastic," "a unique watch with no copycats," "Sky Dweller complications are wonderful."

The Deepsea was criticized for comfort and size (things only enthusiasts would consider)—it was one of the few models where thickness came up.

Enthusiasm, Familiarity, and Age

We asked people how familiar they were with Rolex before the survey. Those who were already familiar gave consistently higher scores across the board. The GMT-Master II was the most extreme example:

— Familiar group: 8.86 average

— Unfamiliar group: 3.67 average

Age played an interesting role here. As we saw, older respondents (ages 36–50 and 51+) rated nearly every model higher than the youngest group (18–25). This could indicate a generational shift in taste, differing interpretations of the ratings scale, both, neither, or something else entirely. The Land-Dweller and Air-King took especially hard hits from the youngest age bracket.

Final Thoughts

There’s no universal answer to what makes a Rolex “great,” but this survey hints at some interesting patterns. Enthusiasts still gravitate toward the icons. Casual respondents leaned more toward simplicity, elegance, and clarity. Watches like the 1908 and OP quietly gained traction. Others, like the Land-Dweller, struggled to resonate, at least for now.

The takeaway isn’t that Rolex is succeeding or failing in any one direction. It's not that new designs are good or bad. It’s that perception is fluid. Familiarity, age, and personal taste all shape how these designs are received. And as Rolex continues to experiment across the lineup, those reactions will likely keep evolving.