or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Versatile dress watch
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Versatile dress watch - Page 4  

post #46 of 119
I love my Cartier Roadster - it always get complimented and makes for a nice stand-out piece.
post #47 of 119
Quote:
I love my Cartier Roadster - it always get complimented and makes for a nice stand-out piece.
I like the shape but i hate the oversized crown... Tood bad for the Cartier. I guess they would sell it much more with a normal crown.
post #48 of 119
Quote:
I love my Cartier Roadster - it always get complimented and makes for a nice stand-out piece.
Agreed. Extremely versatile: easily dressed up or dressed down. I am very happy with mine. And, for what it's worth, I really don't get that many compliments on it -- and I actually like that about this watch. The crown is, perhaps, an acquired taste; not for everyone, but certainly well-integrated into the overall design aesthetic of the watch (to my eyes, at any rate...).
post #49 of 119
Regarding the composition of metal in watches, some companies make this information freely available, whilst others do not; but nonetheless the information is accessible to people in the industry, like I previously stated: "Since I worked (oh, boy how do I explain this concept?) for several years in the watch industry (retail / repair segments) I have a good idea of which I speak" (your refusal to avoid this would lead me to believe that you indeed do not understand the concept of work). As well you did in fact compare watches: "Otherwise, in the same logic, many brands are not manely = Cartier, Dior, Vuitton, Hermes...as their first clients are women and sneakers are very manly as the first models were for men." When I said: "Please make valid factual comparisons or none at all (except if you specifically mention that they are of your opinion only)", that was a suggestion, I have no clue how you came up with: "Please stop telling me what i have to do", especially since I only said it once. "For your information Cartier is not a reference for most of watch lovers" Ernest, anyone who likes watches falls into that category, the fact is that horologists know the importance of the place of Cartier in horological history and its continuing contributions. "Here i just used your logic on a larger scale to show you is was absurd = first hampton was for women SO Hamptons are not manly ?" I just mentioned that it was originally designed for women, and based on that TO ME (again, I clearly stated this was my opinion) it was not as "˜manly' as other watches. Plus, it really does not look like a man's watch...regardless as to how or when or who they designed it for. "Quartz movement are also finished by Cartier. The movement of a Tank is very poorly finished (ask youself why there is not saphir back on this watch)." A sapphire back is merely there to show off the movement, it is not indicative of quality, after all many of the expensive wristwatches / pocket watches on earth do not have ability to view the movement view a sapphire back. "But even if it is x times more expensive (for exemple quartz = 30 euros, auto = 120 euros), the final price of an auto E.T.A. quickly finished (by writting Cartier on it) remains cheap if you compare to the price of the watch (3 000 euros)." They don't just stamp Cartier on it and put it in the watch, they do additional finishing. "And so saying = I wouldn't pay more than $1000 for a quartz watch is stupid if afterwards you don't follow the same logic for the auto Tank (which you seemed to consider as a MUCH BETTER purchase than the quartz one) or the B&M (which you only attack because of the lack of manliness and not because of it cheap movements). When a watch of $4000 has a movement of $50 or $150, the problem is the same = the watch is overpriced as you can find the same movement in $500 watches." Based on that logic, the IWC Grande Complication is overpriced because the movement (base Valjoux 7750) can be found on watches worth $750, and you apply this without taking into consideration that the movement is greatly reworked. "May be you could explain me the reason of this = The Cartier Tank is a nice choice, but don't buy a $1000+ watch with a $5 quartz movement " This implies, you would buy a $4000 watch with a $120 auto movement? Does it sounds more logical ?" First off, I did not say "˜MUCH BETTER'; please do not put words in my mouth. Secondly, I don't know how you did in math at school (I can guess), but based on your own argument: A watch worth $1000 that uses a $5 movement is using a movement that is worth only 0.5% of the watches total value. Whereas a watch worth $4000 that uses a $120 movement is using a movement that is worth 3% of the watches total value. Seems like this watch is a "˜better value', no? At the end these watches are more than the sum of their parts and intrinsic value will add to their retail price (although it will also help resale, if one so wishes to sell). Jon.
post #50 of 119
How about this compared to the Cartier Tank Solo? Baume & Mercier http://www.prestigetime.com/item.php?item_id=2728 A nicer but vastly more expensive one: A. Piguet http://www.prestigetime.com/item.php?item_id=4010
post #51 of 119
Quote:
Regarding the composition of metal in watches, some companies make this information freely available, whilst others do not; but nonetheless the information is accessible to people in the industry, like I previously stated: "Since I worked (oh, boy how do I explain this concept?) for several years in the watch industry (retail / repair segments) I have a good idea of which I speak" (your refusal to avoid this would lead me to believe that you indeed do not understand the concept of work).]
And as you worked (not as a watchmaker obviously) in this area, you know all better than everybody  ? You are a specialist in steel, clockwork...? So then, explain me in what way the steel of B&M is better than the one of Cartier. After, explain me what is the link between the quality of the steel  and the maneliness of the watch.
Quote:
As well you did in fact compare watches "Otherwise, in the same logic, many brands are not manely = Cartier, Dior, Vuitton, Hermes...as their first clients are women and sneakers are very manly as the first models were for men." ]
Where do you see the word "watch" ? I never said watch. The point was just that many companies didn't start their activity in their current area. Cartier's = jewelry Dior = Women's Clothes Does it imply that all their life, Cartier and Dior can make only stuffs for women?
Quote:
Ernest, anyone who likes watches falls into that category, the fact is that horologists know the importance of the place of Cartier in horological history and its continuing contributions. ]
And as you are not an horologist... What is it place comparing to Patek, Vacheron, AP or JL ?
Quote:
I just mentioned that it was originally designed for women ]
I am still looking forward you to showing me an issue about that...
Quote:
and based on that TO ME (again, I clearly stated this was my opinion) it was not as "˜manly' as other watches. ]
I understand, we all talk about our opinion, this seems obvious. The point is don't agree with you on the maneliness of B&M. I gave you my arguments. But you din't give me any arguments and didn't reply to mines. So this is not a dialogue.
Quote:
Plus, it really does not look like a man's watch...regardless as to how or when or who they designed it for.]
When? How? I don't understand. Reply to my question = WHAT IS A MANELY WATCH?
Quote:
A sapphire back is merely there to show off the movement, it is not indicative of quality, after all many of the expensive wristwatches / pocket watches on earth do not have ability to view the movement view a sapphire back. ]
Who told you it was indicative of quality? I have never seen a quartz watch with a saphir back, have you ever? Great many modern upscale watches have a saphir back. As you like Cartier, just check the private collection. What is the % of watches with a saphir back? MOST of them... So why do you have a saphir back on these watches and not on the basic lines of Cartier? I expect a reply as you know all about horological area. [quote]They don't just stamp Cartier on it and put it in the watch, they do additional finishing. What do they do so complicated that over much cheaper brands don't do? Explain me please...
Quote:
Based on that logic, the IWC Grande Complication is overpriced because the movement (base Valjoux 7750) can be found on watches worth $750, and you apply this without taking into consideration that the movement is greatly reworked.]
Yes and then? Of course it is, like most of watches. And cartier is one of the more overpriced. Quartz or auto, the fact that it is overpriced remains. But as you told, the movement is REworked. In a Tank, it is not reworked but just trimmed. Just BASIC decoration.
Quote:
First off, I did not say "˜MUCH BETTER'; please do not put words in my mouth. Secondly, I don't know how you did in math at school (I can guess), but based on your own argument:] A watch worth $1000 that uses a $5 movement is using a movement that is worth only 0.5% of the watches total value. Whereas a watch worth $4000 that uses a $120 movement is using a movement that is worth 3% of the watches total value. Seems like this watch is a "˜better value', no?
You told $5 was just an exemple to illustrate... So why are you stucking to your  $5 ? The fact is you told you would never buy a quartz watch above $1000. But you could buy an auto watch with a $100 movement. So explain me WHY? I guess it is because quartz is in your mind cheaper and you don't wanna pay just for the case and bracelet. But the problem is that you can apply the same logic to basic cheap auto watches... I am not sure that a watch with a movement cheaper than a good croco strap is so much a good value...
post #52 of 119
Quote:
How about this compared to the Cartier Tank Solo? Baume & Mercier http://www.prestigetime.com/item.php?item_id=2728 A nicer but vastly more expensive one: A. Piguet http://www.prestigetime.com/item.php?item_id=4010
These watches are rectangular, Tank (French) is squared.
post #53 of 119
"And as you worked (not as a watchmaker obviously) in this area, you know all better than everybody ? You are a specialist in steel, clockwork...?" More so than you. Perhaps it is a concept that has eluded you into adulthood: opinions are not facts. "Where do you see the word "watch" ? I never said watch. The point was just that many companies didn't start their activity in their current area. Cartier's = jewelry Dior = Women's Clothes Does it imply that all their life, Cartier and Dior can make only stuffs for women?" We were discussing watches; any other topic is not implied unless mentioned. Randomly stating something else altogether to reinforce your damaged argument is weak. "And as you are not an horologist... What is it place comparing to Patek, Vacheron, AP or JL ?" No? What is a horologist Ernest? BTW, Cartier is tied to all the companies you mentioned, it was vital in the continuation of all the four brands. "I am still looking forward you to showing me an issue about that..." I have no idea what that means. "Who told you it was indicative of quality? I have never seen a quartz watch with a saphir back, have you ever? Great many modern upscale watches have a saphir back. As you like Cartier, just check the private collection. What is the % of watches with a saphir back? MOST of them... So why do you have a saphir back on these watches and not on the basic lines of Cartier? I expect a reply as you know all about horological area." Please reread what you wrote, because you countered what you say from one sentence to the next, thanks for making my argument for me. I'm done trying to explain this to you, if you want further erudition; I'm going to have to charge you. Jon.
post #54 of 119
Quote:
Great many modern upscale watches have a saphir back. As you like Cartier, just check the private collection. What is the % of watches with a saphir back? MOST of them...
I believe that is a function of most dress watches.  Sport watches and divers will probably have a solid back. The most obvious examples being the Rolex Sub, Ulysse Nardin 1846 Marine Chronometer, IWC Ingenieur (sorry for the spelling), etc.  Even the JLC Master series offers many designs w/o a sapphire through back.
Quote:
A Cartier Roadster
Isn't that watch a tad big for a dress watch?  I was led to believe that 38mm is the max, and 38.5mm (though I make exceptions if someone would like to donate a Glashutte or Lange 1 my way). EDIT: BTW, ironically Cartier, JLC, IWC, and Baume & Mercier are all owned by Richemont. EDIT #2: And Vacheron...
post #55 of 119
Quote:
"And as you worked (not as a watchmaker obviously) in this area, you know all better than everybody  ? You are a specialist in steel, clockwork...?" More so than you. Perhaps it is a concept that has eluded you into adulthood: opinions are not facts. "Where do you see the word "watch" ? I never said watch. The point was just that many companies didn't start their activity in their current area. Cartier's = jewelry Dior = Women's Clothes Does it imply that all their life, Cartier and Dior can make only stuffs for women?" We were discussing watches; any other topic is not implied unless mentioned. Randomly stating something else altogether to reinforce your damaged argument is weak. "And as you are not an horologist... What is it place comparing to Patek, Vacheron, AP or JL ?" No? What is a horologist Ernest?   BTW, Cartier is tied to all the companies you mentioned, it was vital in the continuation of all the four brands. "I am still looking forward you to showing me an issue about that..." I have no idea what that means. "Who told you it was indicative of quality? I have never seen a quartz watch with a saphir back, have you ever? Great many modern upscale watches have a saphir back. As you like Cartier, just check the private collection. What is the % of watches with a saphir back? MOST of them... So why do you have a saphir back on these watches and not on the basic lines of Cartier? I expect a reply as you know all about horological area." Please reread what you wrote, because you countered what you say from one sentence to the next, thanks for making my argument for me. I'm done trying to explain this to you, if you want further erudition; I'm going to have to charge you.   Jon.
Do you reply this way to hide your lack of argument in a mess? Please learn to quote, this is not so complicated... Questions = 1) what does make a watch "manely" (as it is neither the size nor the thickness nor the details) ? 2) why is the Hampton not "manely"? (taking apart you think it has been designed for women, I mean what is not manely in the watch) 3) why is the Tank more manely? Because it is called TANK? 4) why wouldn't you buy a quartz watch of more than $1000?
post #56 of 119
Back on topic... Another suggestion for PHV... GP Vintage 1945 The depreciate like mad, so you might want to buy used. BTW, Tourneau in NYC is having a sale on their pre-owned timepieces next week. I got suckered into chatting with the Japanese saleslady at the Columbus Circle store, and now she recognizes me by face...
post #57 of 119
Quote:
I believe that is a function of most dress watches.  Sport watches and divers will probably have a solid back. The most obvious examples being the Rolex Sub, Ulysse Nardin 1846 Marine Chronometer, IWC Ingenieur (sorry for the spelling), etc.  Even the JLC Master series offers many designs w/o a sapphire through back.
So why Tanks have no saphir back? Many "dress" watches have no saphir back = Basic TANKs, All Hamptons, The Golden ellipses, many Calatravas, Many Masters Roadster is not a "dress" watch. Many sports watches have a saphir back = Panerai for exemple. Many chronographs have a saphir back. The Hampton spirit have a saphir back (they are twice large as the normal Hampton.) Rolex can not have a saphir because their movements look shoddy and because the saphir back is recent. Rolex doesn't take any risk. They haven't shown any creativity over the last 40 years. So they will not start using saphir back.
post #58 of 119
Quote:
Rolex can not have a saphir because their movements look shoddy and because the saphir back is recent. Rolex doesn't take any risk. They haven't shown any creativity over the last 40 years. So they will not start using saphir back.
That's a load of rubbish, a friend of mine has a Rolex with a clear back, and front as well for that matter.
post #59 of 119
Quote:
Quote:
Rolex can not have a saphir because their movements look shoddy and because the saphir back is recent. Rolex doesn't take any risk. They haven't shown any creativity over the last 40 years. So they will not start using saphir back.
That's a load of rubbish, a friend of mine has a Rolex with a clear back, and front as well for that matter.
Which model is it ?
post #60 of 119
Quote:
Which model is it ?
It is a limited edition Date or Datejust, I am unsure, Oyster Perpetual. With clear front and back to see the movement. In a white metal, could be platinum or white gold.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Versatile dress watch