Rolex's BaselWorld 2019 Release of the New Oyster Perpetual Yacht-Master 42

I am not sure if Baselworld is Rolex's muse, but certainly the Crown prepares their newest lineup of timepieces to release and be announced at this annual event each year.  Each year Rolex stuns us with new pieces that are stunning, and sometimes they make slight changes to existing lines that enhance their artform.  This year is no different.  I will discuss each new timepiece in separate posts.

Today I want to focus on the most exciting new timepiece - the Oyster Perpetual Yacht-Master 42.  The 42mm diameter is a new size for Yacht-Master which falls between the 35 -44mm range.  It has a bigger feel without adding too much weight or feeling too excessive on most wrists.

Inside the new 42mm is the new-generation caliber 3235 movement manufactured entirely by Rolex. This self-winding movement is made of nickel-phosphorus making it insensitive to magnetic interference. It combines 14 patents offering gains in precision, power reserve, shock resistance and resistance to magnetic fields. It provides a new Chronergy escapement which adds to the new 70 hour power reserve. 

The new Oyster Perpetual Yacht-Master 42 utilizes the Oysterflex Bracelet which offeres a sporty alternative to metal bracelets.  Known for their resiliency, strength and comfort, the rubber band provides a great feel and fit to the Yacht-Master owner.  It is protected with the Oysterlock safety clasp in titanium and a nickel alloy metal blade.  The black strap also matches the black dial and bezel - tying the dark color scheme of the entire timepiece.  

The Yacht-Master 42 has a reference number of 226659.  The 42 mm case is made from 18 ct white gold.  The large luminescent hour markers and large luminescent hour, minute and seconds hands provide stunning visibility at night and readability during the day.  The date window at 3 o'clock with cyclops lens provides excellent date readability.  The bezel is bidirectionally rotatable utilizing raised polished numerals which not only provide excellent functionality and visibility but a tactile ability to distinguish calculation times between two buoys.

The timepiece is protected by a screw-down triplock waterproofness system which protects the reference 226659 to 330 feet.  Rolex certifies the Yacht-Master 42 with the Superlative Chronometer seal of approval.

My favorite part of the Yacht-Master 42 is the combined look and feel.  It is comfortable to wear and yet has a look of luxury that could both be utilized in the sea, sailing and at sport, and look just as luxurious while wearing a gown or tuxedo.  The raised middle layer of the Oysterflex gives a tuxedo look to it, making it a very versatile sports watch that can be ready for anything.

Rubber B versus Everest Comparison Review - Two Rubber Straps for Rolex Daytona Ceramic

Rubber B vs Everest - Vulcanized Rubber Bands for Rolex

As you guys know, I do not usually do product reviews. But since I decided to try a rubber strap for my new Daytona with ceramic bezel, saving the gorgeous Rolex Oyster bracelet at least for the first Summer, I figured with so many options, I would do some research and document my experience with a few curved-end rubber straps to compare (for an OEM look). So I picked the two brands that most people are always talking about: Everest Bands versus Rubber B.

When I initially sat down to buy a strap online, the first company I reached out to was Rubber B, because I have a friend who has one for his Rose Gold Daytona and he loves it. He lives in Chicago (a bit too far for me to go see his strap in person). So I asked Rubber B if they would like to provide me with a complimentary strap for a review, or a discount (thinking I would do the same for Everest as well). But their answer was a polite but solid NO. Apparently they do not offer freebies or discounts for bloggers so that was disappointing. I figured that I could just return it once inspected otherwise. In all candor, I didn't ask Everest for a discount or a freebie either after that, because I did not want to end up with a slighted opinion when comparing Rubber B to Everest, and anyway one or both straps would possibly be going back, since both companies offer a similar return policy.

If you are looking for quick honest answer without reading too much in-depth, then I’ll tell you up-front that the Rubber B strap was my personal clear winner (unless you have an extra large wrist). Read further below for all the reasons why...

First Impressions of Rubber B versus Everest:


Both Daytona straps came in their own branded envelopes (Rubber B in a rubber type envelope delivered by UPS versus Everest in a linen card stock envelope delivered via USPS). Everest included a computer print out on regular bright white paper and Rubber B receipt was printed on tan linen paper. To some it might not be a big deal and it’s understandable, however if we are to make a complete side-by-side comparison, then we have to look at all aspects of the term “Luxury”. Both straps came with various instruction, warranty or maintenance cards. Both straps came in their respective plastic sleeve package.

The Rubber B came with a very basic sticker-sealed plastic sleeve similar to what I have gotten before with my OEM Omega and Breitling straps. It does leave you wondering why luxury brands do not provide a nicer strap storage option.

Rubber B Packaging
The Everest strap came in a pleasant reusable heavy-duty plastic pouch.

Everest Packaging
Most Importantly, The Straps Themselves-

Rubber B and Everest bands side by side

Rubber B on Rolex Daytona


When I began handling the Rubber B strap, I immediately liked it. The material is not sticky or grabby like some rubber straps are. It is smooth and has a high quality feeling to it. The color is dark black and the rubber is a more matte finish. It doesn’t scratch or scar, which is something I have noticed that does happen with my cousin’s matte rubber Rolex OysterFlex bracelet that came on his Rose Gold Yachtmaster 40mm. In contrast, the Rubber B strap has a very smooth matt surface that doesn’t scratch and it is soft (flexible). It bends easily and nicely around my wrist. Overall, the material feels more robust than the Everest band (which I describe further down).

Rubber B open and closed


Regarding design, there are a few things I noticed about the Rubber B strap: It does not seem to have any division or fusion marks along the sides. It is all black with no type of glossy finish. The design is sharp with a distinct T-shape that mimics a Rolex end link connection but then tapers and gradually dissipates down towards the buckle.

Close-up of the tight integration of the Rubber B band to the Rolex Daytona case


This 18mm buckle in stainless steel has a nice medium weight feeling and a polish that matches the Rolex watch steel (a brushed finish). Something that did come as a surprise to me was the Rubber B tang buckle having a spring-bar which is easy to remove and looks sharp because it does not have any holes or screws on the side that can wear with time.

Rubber B Tang Buckle


The Rubber B tang buckle band is shorter than the Everest band, especially on the 6 o’clock side. This is a positive aspect for me personally because my wrist size is standard so the Rubber B doesn’t overwhelm my 6.75” wrist. I really like the fit of the Rubber B because it looks like is made for my wrist circumference. There is not too much left hanging over the design. The retainer loops are a bit thinner than I would have expected. This is good for looks and comfort (not bulky), but I’ll see how long they will last under long-term pressure. The Rubber B strap material being so dense, my initial thoughts were that it would feel thick on my wrist, especially in comparison with the Rolex bracelet. But the strap is actually surprisingly very light to wear, comfortable and not stiff or bulky at all. I will add more long-term information after the strap has been worn for a while, to report if the strap stays as comfortable as it is at first (I once bought a cuff for my Rolex Deepsea, which felt comfortable for a day or two and then I wanted to rip it off my arm it got so irritating). Thankfully this shouldn't happen with the Rubber straps according to my friends with more Rubber B experience.

Rubber B Vulcanized Rubber Bracelet from different angles
Notice in this quad photo above that the Rubber B buckle sits in a comfortable spot on my wrist and the strap tip doesn’t wrap too far around my arm.


The Rubber B rubber feels like the type of rubber used in car tires, but much more flexible. It is smooth and matte. It is dense, and the color is a true dark black (more black than tires though). The strap altogether feels similar to my Omega and AP straps, even though those designs are different. I really couldn't tell the difference feeling wise, so if you have one of those rubber straps then you basically are already familiar with Rubber B material.

Rolex Daytona after Rubber B installation

Rubber B straps are made for one watch case (like Daytona and GMT II Ceramic have the same case), and therefore the Rubber B’s do not come with any pins or spring bars and it does not fit other watches like Submariner. I was able to easily slip my Rolex Daytona spring-bar into the Rubber B strap’s hard insert area, and the pin sat there hugged nicely in during the install. It was an easy mount using my Burgeon tool. The second spring-bar tip just clicked right in and I jiggled the strap while dangling it with the weight of the watch over the table, just to be sure it was locked (which it was). I did use painter’s tape to protect my lug backs during install FYI.

Everest Band on a Rolex Daytona

The Everest band looked nice upon first sight out of the package. It is bizarrely much lighter weight than I was expecting, and it feels quite different from the Rubber B strap rubber. The surface of the Everest band has a silky slick feel to the touch. The strap is extremely lightweight (not dense) and flips and flops a lot as you handle it. I noticed this because the strap came with some pins already positioned inside the lug area insert, and as I handled the strap inspecting it, the pins accidentally fell out onto the table a few times (with one rolling onto the floor). The hole of the Everest pin shaft is fatter than the actual pin diameter for some reason. The Rubber B strap did not have this issue, since the pin shaft of that strap was identical diameter to my Rolex Daytona pins. With the Rubber B, I could handle the strap and attach to the lugs without the pins falling out. The grip and fit on the Daytona case were firm, whereas the Everest band did have a slight loose feeling.

A couple of other things I noticed when further inspected: Although the rubber of the Everest band was “black”, it is not a pure deep black color. It had some sort of a glossy grey finish. For my black dial Daytona Ceramic I would prefer a darker black.
Deeper black coloring on the Rubber B band and lighter black on the Everest band

It also seems that the Everest strap construction is maybe divided in two pieces with an odd line that goes from top to bottom (like a fused seem or maybe its just a mark along the side (facing camera) from the creation process that was not sanded away in the finishing). There is a slight bulging of the rubber beside each lug, like the strap is squeezed a bit, but that doesn’t bother me too much. Overall, it’s a good strap and I would wear it if it were my only option. I do keep going back to the material difference with Rubber B, because the Everest feels like it has a mixture of something like silicone that gives it the floppy feeling.


The Everest design is nice enough - simple and superficial lines with a straight voluminous shaped edge. I talk more about their design at the end of this review.
Everest Rubber Band open and closed


The buckle is very nice with a smooth polish, and a screw pin on the side. Mine arrived with a scratch on the side that most likely occurred during factory assembly, but not a huge complaint there. The screw pin was easy to take off and on. Both brand Rubber B and Everest buckles are pretty great and way too similar actually.
Comparison between the Rubber B tang buckle and Everest buckle


Like the Rubber B strap, the Everest band also feels comfortable against the skin. Being very long (more than most standard sized straps), the Everest is obviously built to accommodate a broad range of extra large wrists sizes because it is so long.
Everest Bracelet from 4 different angles

The Everest band also has a lot of holes to choose from, and they are very close together. I'm not sure if this is a plus or a minus, because while providing more adjustability, it does make the strap look less elegant (much more sporty and kind of like a more affordable Hirsch type of strap). And the overall length of the Everest band is quite a bit longer than average.

Notice in this side-by-side photo that the Everest band sits quite far to the edge of my 6.75 inch wrist, whereas the Rubber B fits perfectly:
Darker Black Rubber B band has more center fit while lighter black Everest band seems to be made for much larger wrist. 


The Everest rubber resembles a good quality car window-seal type of material (or a new squeegee). It is silky smooth, has a floppy light-weight density, and the color is not pure black (it is a lighter black). Nothing to diss. Most importantly, and similar to the Rubber B strap, this rubber also does not stick to my skin or feel tacky, and there is no vanilla or other scent (which I would hate).


Installation was very easy on both straps. I used a Bergeon spring bar tool. I suggest protecting the lugs with painting tape if you are inexperienced with removing an Oyster bracelet. The Rubber B did not come with spring bars as they state it is meant to be used only with original Rolex spring bars. The Everest band comes with 2 stainless steel spring bars that were thinner than my own bars. I decided to try both straps with the Rolex spring bars first for a thorough comparison. The Rubber B mounted perfectly on my first try. The pin slid easily into and rested in the shaft without falling out, while I worked at mounting the lug area. The spring bar clicked into position on the lug hole instantly without any pressure or forcing. Very secure and snug fit. The Everest strap also mounted very easily, however the pins do always want to slide/fall out while handling the strap. And once installed, there was a slight wiggle around the pin that I did not like. I am assuming now at this point that the Everest band might be developed for to use with another watch or maybe more watches than this one Daytona, because why would it fit so loosely? I'm not sure how safe the Everest band is, but I don't think I would worry too much if that was my only option.


In this criteria I will let the pictures do the talking according to your own tastes and will point out a few observations. The Rubber B strap without a doubt has a much better fitment/calibration onto my Daytona case than the Everest. The strap does not have any jiggle or movement around the pins. Plus it simply aligns perfectly with the case and lugs. The Everest strap has an integrated and nice design as well. Even though the pin shaft is so spacious around the pin itself which allows the strap to move a bit around the pin, the rubber still does seem slightly squeezed between the lugs, and you can notice a bit of pressure to the strap. This is not a huge issue, but a little detail I noticed on the Everest that the Rubber B did not have. See the pictures below to better understand.

(Sometimes my photos here show the Everest strap looking light gray in color, but that is just the lighting picking up the gloss because the strap is black, but It’s just not as black as the Rubber B in real life).


Here is where I have seen back and forth in other reviews and forums. I don’t think a good vulcanized rubber strap is going to have a huge “quality” argument amongst them. So we can instead consider the time-lines. When looking into the history of both brands online, I could see that Rubber B came out with the very first rubber Rolex straps in early 2011 and there was nobody else out there at that time making integration style straps for Rolex that I could find. The Rubber B straps look pretty much to have no changes in material or design since they first made the scene. Everest came along by the end of 2012 (according to their Kickstarter campaign and their Facebook page first launch Everest looks to have had several versions of their Rolex band with a few "do-overs" like the first one being made I think in the USA of TPE plastic and having an unflattering design, and then another one where they revised their design to current. Now they say on the site that the strap is vulcanized rubber.


This can be completely subjective based on your own sensitivities, taste, and body type. If your wrist is standard size, then go for the Rubber B for a more upscale look and precisely calibrated fit for your watch, plus comfortable to wear. If your wrist is closer to eight inches, then definitely go for the Everest and you would be well suited with a very good and comfortable strap as well. The calibrations are not as up to par as with the Rubber B, but the design preference is personal so you may prefer the Everest over my opinions anyhow. If you are looking at the types of straps these companies offer for the Rolex deployment clasp, then that is an entirely different fit and these rules no longer apply.

Below are some various rubber straps I have currently, side by side.

Here you see the materials of my AP strap and the Rubber B strap are totally similar.

Final Thoughts

Every choice is a matter of personal preference. My winner in this comparison is obviously the Rubber B strap on several levels. It seems like its made for one watch case, whereas the Everest band having less perfect case adaptation and skinny after-market pins, seems like it is probably made to fit a different watch or a variety of watches. Rubber B is the most similar to the luxury brand stuff I’m already familiar with in both material and absolute perfect integration with the case, so it checks all of my boxes in regards to all the criteria discussed above. It’s a deep black, has a high-end look, fits me better, and feels more durable.

Thanks for taking the time to read my first review. I actually enjoyed it, and hope to do some more (Rolex watch personal reviews for beginners) very soon as well!

Rolex Stuns Baselworld 2019 with the Tiger Rolex Daytona

At Baselworld 2019 Rolex unveiled its most luxurious Rolex for 2019 - a sparkling 18 ct yellow gold version of the Oyster Perpetual Cosmograph Daytona reference 116588 TBR.

This is the iconic watch for those with a passion for driving and speed. This new design makes subtle reference to the 18 ct Everose gold version released in 2018, whose bezel is adorned with sapphires in rainbow colours - a true showstopper at the Baselworld 2018.

This new version applies a more stealthy and uniform design on the celebrated racing chronograph. This new timepiece is designed on the time-honored 40mm Oyster case with pushers at the 2 and 4 o'clock positions.  In lieu of the tachymetric scale on the bezel Rolex designers applied 36 trapeze-cut diamonds. Although this is less colorful than the rainbow of sapphires representing the fine gemologists of Rolex, the diamonds provide an intense sparkle and do not detract from the amazing workmanship of the dial.

The dial is the most amazing part of this timepiece.  The black lacquer dial has black and champagne-colour chronograph counters surrounded by intertwined artistry of black lacquer and diamonds. Encircling the dial are 8 diamond hour markers in 18 ct yellow gold settings, and gold Arabic numerals 15, 30 and 45 located at the 3, 6 and 9 o’clock positions.

The middle case is crafted from a solid piece of 18 ct yellow gold. The case back, edged with fine fluting, is hermetically screwed down with a special tool that allows only Rolex watchmakers to access the movement. The winding crown, fitted with the Triplock triple waterproofness system and protected by an integral crown guard, screws down securely against the case, along with the chronograph pushers. The crystal is made of virtually scratchproof sapphire. 

This version of the Cosmograph Daytona is fitted with a rubber Oysterflex bracelet, which extends the black coloring of the timepiece while providing a more comfortable and easy to adjust fit. Rolex designed this bracelet with flexible metal blades manufactured from a titanium and nickel alloy, covered with high-performance elastomer.  It is a highly durable material.  The inside of the Oysterflex bracelet is equipped with longitudinal cushions that stabilize the watch on the wrist. The Oysterflex bracelet is equipped with an Oysterlock folding safety clasp in 18 ct yellow gold, which prevents accidental opening. It also features the Easylink comfort extension link which allows the bracelet length to be increased by approximately 5 mm quickly and easily.

The reference 116588 TBR is equipped with calibre 4130, a self-winding mechanical chronograph movement developed and manufactured by Rolex with 44 rubies. Rolex has designed this timepiece with fewer components, a blue Parachrom hairspring and a Rolex overcoil for precision , shock resistance and anti-magnetic elements to protect against interference.  The Calibre 4130 is equipped with a self-winding module via a Perpetual rotor and offers a power reserve of approximately 72 hours. Like all Rolex watches, the Oyster Perpetual Cosmograph Daytona is exhaustedly tested and covered by the Superlative Chronometer certification which guarantees precision for 5 years.

The Oyster case of the Cosmograph Daytona is guaranteed waterproof to a depth of 100 metres (330 feet). As if to not leave anything to chance, Rolex also covers the 19 ct yellow gold hands with highly legible chromalight which provides a long-lasting blue glow even at night.  

Although the representative Rolex Daytona released at Baselworld 2018 was more colorful and eye-catching, I far prefer this timepiece.  The complexity of the design of the dial will draw you in and before you know it you will be lost with wonder admiring this work of art for minutes or even hours.
Although it is less practical than a standard Rolex Daytona for driving purposes, it has a multitude of practical uses. In addition, I find this timepiece more universally designed for men and women than the 2018 model and I would be proud to wear it if I had one.  Although the timepiece is designed to be worn in an active lifestyle such as during exercise, boating, and swimming, I would probably limit the exposure to these activities since it lends itself more to more formal situations.

Featured Post

Rolex Online Resources