or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 1520  

post #22786 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

To me, a chronograph is a working watch, a tool. It should look workmanlike.

Really, really, really disagree with this statement - there are so many interesting "dress" chronographs, past and present. Not to mention the perpetual calendar chronographs which are almost exclusively "dress" watches.

Sure, I get the tool reference, but to extend the analogy - there are sharpened rocks... and then there are samurai swords. Both fulfill the same function, one just looks a hell of a lot nicer while doing so. tounge.gif
Edited by apropos - 7/7/13 at 2:00am
post #22787 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

I am a gigantic fan of the Speedy. I posted a fairly extensive review of it over on WUS, that I will link over here for posterity.

I think that a comparison between the Speedy and the Daytona just really isn't fair. They are two incredibly different watches, despite being black-dialed, stainless steel, sports chronographs. They both have storied histories, and they are both great watches in their own right. I will say this though. The Speedmaster that went to the moon sure as hell is not the speedmaster they are selling now.

Here is a picture of the Cal 321 movement, and if you can see at 12:00, it was outfitted with a lovely column wheel:



Whereas here is the Cal 1861:



Unfortunately, Omega replaced the column wheel with a CAM system. Quel dommage.

But the new Speedmaster is a great evolution of a great watch. It is probably my favorite watch I own.

Speedy Review:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Omega Speedmaster Professional 3570.50: Thoughts and Review.

Preface: excuse my photography, it is not very good.

Since there have already been an absurd number of reviews regarding this watch, I will not try to reinvent the wheel. Everyone knows the specs, and the general overview of the watch, so I would like to write something for those on the fence about picking one up! I have tried to be as honest as possible in writing this! Also, as an aside, I currently own a Seiko Orange Monster, Orient Black Mako, I used to have a Damasko DC56, I have handled the Rolex Explorer I, II, and Sub, and am now the owner of a JLC MUT Moon. So at the very least, I have handled watches in similar price ranges, and can at least perform some sort of comparative analysis. With that said, I do not proclaim to be an expert on much horologically, just an average guy with a passion for watches.

First Impressions:

To be honest… I was not overly impressed with the watch when I first opened the case! It was not really love at first sight. I had tried it on at an AD before purchasing from the FAD, and I enjoyed it, but I was always kind of reticent about purchasing the watch. The Speedy Pro was always more of an ‘intelligent’ purchase—it has pedigree, it is well-made, has a classic design, it is tough, etc. I really hoped that I would bond with it over the ensuing months. So, lets fast forward a few months…

Four Months of Ownership:

I think that I can safely say that I love my Speedmaster. I had a feeling that this day would come. I wear this darn watch every day I can, and there are just so many things about it that are awesome. My other watches have been thoroughly neglected (I am in casual-mode right now, so the JLC would not get much time anyways). So what do I love about it?

First, the lyre lugs. If I can think of one thing I love about the watch, it has to be the lugs. I remember Seiko Ananta describing their lugs as inspired by Samurai Swords, or something of that ilk. That is the feeling that I get when I look at the lugs on the Speedy Pro. They are beautifully sculpted, and are a nice mix of brushed and polished surfaces. The polished features give the watch a nice ‘gleam’ when viewed from certain angles, but they do not really garner any attention. In fact, in the four months I have owned the watch, I have never had anyone notice it. Personally, that is a plus for me, but I guess that may be a negative for others. The attention to the case in general is absolutely amazing. The finishing is up to snuff with anyone in the same ball-park.





Second, the dial. I think the best part of the dial is that I seriously doubt it will ever get ‘old.’ It is classic, as perfectly proportioned as you can get, toolish, legible (both the chronograph indices and the time), and just plain pleasant to look at. It is nothing ‘special,’ and there are no gimmicks. But in simplicity there is much beauty! Form really does follow function, and there is nothing on the dial that is superfluous, which I appreciate. This may not be the kind of face that draws ‘oohs and ahhs,’ or that really anyone notices, but at the same time, I really cannot see anyone disliking it. When I hear negative remarks about the Speedy, people usually say “it’s boring,” “nothing special,” etc. However, I think it is very difficult to say that the dial is not aesthetically pleasing. The watch is not polarizing in the least, and I can really appreciate that. It is not like the Orange Monster, where comments run the gamut. Now, with that said, although I do love the dial, at times I wish that it had a bit more flash and panache. But then I remember, such attributes often get old. I am glad that Omega decided not to spruce up the dial like they did with the new Planet Ocean, and have kept the Speedy pretty much untouched. As much as I loved the look of the appliqués on the new PO when I first saw it, I have grown to appreciate more and more the look of the original painted numerals. Same things goes with something like the Sub. I think that by adding the white gold border around the lume plots, they really compromised the simplicity and the toolishness of the dial.



And don't forget, the dial is made even more beautiful with that beautiful domed hesalite. It really does add a warmth, as has been said ad nauseum. But it is a warmth that you have to see and experience to really understand! I wrote off the term warmth as well when I first heard it. But the watch really does look different from every possible angle, and that makes it very special in my opinion. The black color of the dial is much softer when viewed through the hesalite. It almost gives it a brownish-yellow tinge. I would urge any first time Speedy buyer to consider the hesalite. After four months, I still do not even have a tiny scratch on it, and it really adds to the aesthetics.



The movement so far has treated me far better than I expected. It really does not gain or lose any time. Since I have owned it, I usually let it wind down before I ever change the time. It fluctuates a little bit, but it is still almost down to the second. I am probably a lucky case though! For those people who have been deterred at the thought of owning a manual… DON’T BE! It is GREAT. It has completely converted me over to the ‘other’ side. It is such a pleasing ritualistic behavior, and really helps you bond with the watch. It is like the watch equivalent of breast-feeding (but to a lesser extent).



I can think of a few negatives I guess (although none of them are deal breakers for me). The play with the pushers is not the best, but I guess that can be expected from a chronograph in this price range. Personally, I think that the bracelet may need a little bit of an overhaul. Don’t get me wrong, it is not bad, but there are some things that sort of bother me. I think that, at the very least, the bracelet could be better integrated with the lugs. If you look closely, the endlinks, although they sit flush with the case, do not curve with the lugs. To be honest, I think that the bracelet design kind of clashes with the overall design of the watch. I think it as aesthetically pleasing design, there is just something about it that I feel doesn’t go with the watch. I also think that it could be beefed up to be more proportional to the case. With all that said, it is very comfortable, and does not catch hairs.




The clasp it solid, but I think that it could also be improved upon. When I compare it to the clasp on the new Explorer or Submariner, I really think that Omega could start improving upon their designs. With that said, it does not feel tinny, has a nice weight, is comfortable, and I have not had any issues with it.

Great review and photos! especially the shots of the different movements.
post #22788 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post


You know, this avatar has been quite a big hit smile.gif.

And back to Stitchy

Let me start off with just a little touch on the perspective that I am coming from. I love watches, I love the world of watches, and, obviously, I love talking about watches. At the very end of your thread, you said “Is the watch world perfect? No. […] But it keeps me happy.” I could not agree more with that statement. I am a bit of a compulsive hobbiest, as I like to call it, and this hobby is one of the few things that keeps me grounded, and what brings me back to this thread every day.

But I realize that the imperfections in the watch industry are a direct result of us, the consumers. And the only way that we can change whatever bothers us about the industry is changing our own behavior.

I am still thinking through my response, ended up doing more bar prep than I anticipated (“go me!”), but I wanted to post this little blurb from Marcus Hanke, the Zenith moderator on TPP. It really touches on a lot of great points in my opinion.

I want to hit more on what you said, because I think you really made some great points in your last post. I am in agreement with a lot of what you said. Of course, I really appreciate your counter-points.

Without further adieu:
* * * The following is not my writing * * *

With the exception of the so-called “crisis” in 2007/08, that was rather a mere economical hiccup than a real crisis, the watch industry has been through a decade of constant growth, that is marked by - who wonders - an equally steep price increase.

Of course I am fully aware that a true connoisseur, or a Purist, has a perception of “value” that is independent from an artificially created definition in Mammon’s realm, vulgo price. But it is so much easier to appreciate this “value” when you are not living under a bridge, having sold your house for a luxury watch. I mean, is there any celestial rule dictating that an industrially produced watch, with a movement bare of any hand-applied finish, and a standard complication, like a chronograph or a second timezone, has to cost an average white-collar-worker’s net income of six or seven months? In stainless steel, or course. I think not, and there is absolutely no reasonable explanation for such a price level, other than that the prices demanded are paid. And, I fear having to admit, this is a rather convincing argument.

Apparently, the number of “connoisseurs” has globally increased so much that its demand for watches supports the ever-growing production output of the luxury watch industry. And you do not have to read all works by Adam Smith to understand that this demand is driving up the prices.

However, there is also no basic law forcing us to buy all those products. A “connoisseur” is somebody “connaissant”, someone who “knows”. Which includes knowing that high value and quality are not necessarily bound to the respectively newest product of a certain manufacturer; or to the products of a certain manufacturer at all. Quality and value can be found in all places, the game is dodging the constraining influences of the masses and finding the not so apparent gems. A true connoisseur will never let a marketing department define his impression of “value” and “quality”.

There is a world beyond Chateau Lafitte, beyond those Bordeaux proud of their 1855 classifications. Many, many Crus Bourgeois are absolutely excellent, very near, if not on par with the top wines. And if you want to find a magnificent value at even lower market prices, try the wonderful wines of the Pays d’Oc, or of South Africa, Southern America, Australia, New Zealand ...

Fortunately for us, a similar rescue is available in the world of watches: I was deeply impressed by the high level of quality and unique design offered by brands like Certina, Tissot, Rado, Citizen, Seiko, and so on. When you see an automatic steel chronograph in an excellent steel case, with a flawlessly finished, shining brown metal dial, and a reliable, yet mass-produced ETA movement, that is to be released this autumn at a price for about 1,000 Swiss francs, then you will accept the assertions of some “big” brands, that their watches are so expensive because of the high prices demanded by their case/dial/hands/crystal suppliers for this quality, with a huge grain of salt.

So what is under the line of my impressions from this year’s Basel fair? We as enthusiasts, connoisseurs or PuristS have to cease being mere puppets of the “big” brands’ marketing departments, trying to explain why their products have to be so expensive. Let’s make our own evaluations of quality and value, and let us draw our own conclusions. Finally, we should not hesitate to turn our backs on products and manufacturers that in our opinion have lost the adequateness of price and “value” out of their eyes. I am convinced, that sooner or later they will crawl back, begging for our attention.

Until then, I will enjoy good watches and great wines with less prestigious names printed on them, but with the awareness of having something good.

 

I agree with the most of the items.  Yet this writing fails to mention one critical thing:  What you buy says more about you than it says about the product.   People have values and people tend to buy services and products from the companies with similar values.  That's why it may be hard for some people to ditch the expensive watch habit and it may be even harder for brands to attract buyers who simply have different value preferences.  If one seeks a timeless design and ability to repair a watch for many years to come, then why would she go outside of the brands who have already delivered on this promise?  If another seeks luxury and exclusivity (e.g., limited number of watches), then going with a mass produced item does not make sense. 

 

In other words, we are all victims of marketing one way or another.  The only difference is in the nerve endings a marketing message strikes. 

post #22789 of 48312
Omega Speedmaster X-33 2nd Gen

I went a bit overboard after I purchased my Speedy Pro, read up on its proposed replacement, X-33, and the fact only NASA and USAF pilots can order them since 2006 made me want one, so went to Rakuten and sourced a Japanese 2nd hand one.

While it's a great tool watch made in Titanium, thus very light, I think this is the first time I wore in it the last year. My original plan was to wear the watch while I work out, and that clearly didn't work out, happy.gif

It now rests in my winder box and acts as the time correction watch for my other mechanical watches.


Edited by wurger - 7/7/13 at 12:46am
post #22790 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa kot View Post

I agree with the most of the items.  Yet this writing fails to mention one critical thing:  What you buy says more about you than it says about the product.   People have values and people tend to buy services and products from the companies with similar values.  That's why it may be hard for some people to ditch the expensive watch habit and it may be even harder for brands to attract buyers who simply have different value preferences.  If one seeks a timeless design and ability to repair a watch for many years to come, then why would she go outside of the brands who have already delivered on this promise?  If another seeks luxury and exclusivity (e.g., limited number of watches), then going with a mass produced item does not make sense. 

In other words, we are all victims of marketing one way or another.  The only difference is in the nerve endings a marketing message strikes. 

Men have been striving to out do each other since time immemorial. We've moved on from banging each other with rocks, to stabbing each other with bronze spears, to slashing each other with iron swords, to outdoing each other at court with the best outfits and hairdos, to buying the best furniture to fill our houses, to dressing down and competing to capture the spirit of understated elegance, to sporting the most recognisable brands, to blinging it out and conspicuous consumption... to purchasing watches with steel cases and gold rotors that make us feel just that little bit superior than the other fellow with the gold watch with the steel rotor.

biggrin.gif

(this post may or may not have been made under the influence of some fine amber 80 proof liquid that is old enough to sleep with legally)
post #22791 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post



My choice between the two would be the Speedy.

To me, a chronograph is a working watch, a tool. It should look workmanlike. The Speedmaster is eminently legible.

As elegant as the Daytona may be, it's nowhere near as clear to read. I don't doubt that it has a higher spec movement, but given that the Speedmaster survived NASA tests and use, does it matter? Granted the Rolex will run smoother and be more accurate and as an automatic will be more convenient. But we're talking government work here. I've only handled the Daytona in stores, but it just seems less exciting to operate. The Speedy has more of a sense of drama to it. The Daytona is like a Mercedes. A new Mercedes. The Speedmaster is more like the Range Rover you see on those crazy Top Gear episodes: It may well break down, but you can get it back up on the road again just buy banging on it, and you'll have more fun getting there. .

Moreover, these are both relatively basic chronos as far as functions are concerned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Daytona doesn't have flyback or split-second functions, and neither does the Speedy. Can we get one of these two makers to make a center minute chronograph?

Plus to me the Daytona just looks like an old man watch, rather like the Omega Connie. More leisure suit than lounge suit. Now of course if you throw in a 6263, all of that goes out the window. The 6263 would be more like the Mercedes 300 gullwing of watches.

All of this of course should be taken with a grain of salt, since I'm far more likely to consider something incredibly obscure like the Lemania South African Air Force chronograph as the ultimate watch in this category.

Hayward,

 


Thank's for the disclaimer about taking your post with a grain of salt, I had to. I often agree with your assessments of watches, but here...I simply can't.  If you are a newbie I can more easily understand the fascination and being drawn in by Omega's marketing, "This is the watch that passed their tests and went to the moon."  Yes, that may be true if you have one with Cal 321, but the current watch is simply not the same as what went to the moon.  So relying on the NASA test is like saying, you wanted the car with the highest top speed in the world so you bought a current Jaguar XK8...because according to a 1964 edition of Road & Track magazine they said an E-Type Jag was one of the fastest cars in the world.  It simply makes no sense.  I completely, understand the historic importance of the Omega Speedy Pro, and if you like the history behind the model, I can appreciate and understand that. But a roughly 45 year old test to justify the modern version doesn't make much sense.

 

As for the Daytona being an old man's watch and the Speedy being more exciting to operate, I've used both.  While I think both are great watches, I didn't find the Daytona to be for old people, nor did I find the Speedy Pro more exciting to use.  If you are using your Speedy Pro and finding it more exciting, what are you doing with it?  I hope they explained to you it gets strapped to your wrist and not to your...never mind...have your fun.wink.gif  

 

Both are great watches and owners need not justify choosing one over the other.  Each is a great choice...although having both is probably even better!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by apropos View Post


Really, really, really disagree with this statement - there are so many interesting "dress" chronographs, past and present. Not to mention the perpetual calendar chronographs which are almost exclusively "dress" watches.

Sure, I get the tool reference, but to extend the analogy - there are sharpened rocks... and then there are samurai swords. Both fulfill the same function, one just looks a hell of a lot nicer while doing so. tounge.gif

+1

 

Spot on !

Quote:
Originally Posted by wurger View Post

Omega Speedmaster X-33 2nd Gen

I went a bit overboard after I purchased my Speedy Pro, read up on its proposed replacement, X-33, and the fact only NASA and USAF pilots can order them since 2006 made me want one, so went to Rakuten and sourced a Japanese 2nd hand one.

While it's a great tool watch made in Titanium, thus very light, I think this is the first time I wore in it the last year. My original plan was to wear the watch while I work out, and that clearly didn't work out, happy.gif

It now rests in my winder box and acts as the time correction watch for my other mechanical watches.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

I like the use of titanium for a watch.  Its definitely a nice change from steel, and its great on watches with large cases and what would normally be very heavy bracelets.  However, that design just doesn't call to me.  Sounds, like maybe it doesn't work for you either, but at least you found a use for it.  Who knows, maybe at some point it will get sold or traded for something that will get actual wrist time.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by apropos View Post


Men have been striving to out do each other since time immemorial. We've moved on from banging each other with rocks, to stabbing each other with bronze spears, to slashing each other with iron swords, to outdoing each other at court with the best outfits and hairdos, to buying the best furniture to fill our houses, to dressing down and competing to capture the spirit of understated elegance, to sporting the most recognisable brands, to blinging it out and conspicuous consumption... to purchasing watches with steel cases and gold rotors that make us feel just that little bit superior than the other fellow with the gold watch with the steel rotor.

biggrin.gif

(this post may or may not have been made under the influence of some fine amber 80 proof liquid that is old enough to sleep with legally)

Very accurate and interesting statement (+ disclaimer).  Doesn't appear that the amber 80 proof liquid affected your writing skills.  

post #22792 of 48312
newC - great speedy post, very well done.


agree with points about present speedy not being old speedy, and i cant possibly imagine the daytona to be an old mans watch. that is reserved for the all yellow gold day/date in my book. also, do not agree that a chrono is primarily a tool watch. most people rarely, if at all, use the chrono function. its just another complication to most people, or a pleasant dial layout.
post #22793 of 48312
Daytona vs Speedy? Yes, thank you very much. I only own a Daytona for now, but that might change smile.gif

Let me share my wonderful day with you guys! Summer has finally got a strong hold on my northern hood. Spent the day with my family on the beach, walking distance from home. The water was just a bit too cold for me, but my daughter doesn't care. We ate ice cream. Went home, had in-laws over, I escaped to the local gym and managed to get a decent workout before hurrying home to man the grill. Cooked a simple meal of salmon, veggies and potatoes. A glass of crispy dry rosé. Photographed my Daytona while my dinner companions laughed at me. Strawberries, ice cream and a local ice cider for dessert. Watched the sun set from our balcony. All good.

1-DSC_6334_zps2e38d01f.jpg

2-DSC_6337_zps280e775b.jpg

3-DSC_6338_zps876a74a4.jpg

4-DSC_6344_zps87680319.jpg
post #22794 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

newC - great speedy post, very well done.


agree with points about present speedy not being old speedy, and i cant possibly imagine the daytona to be an old mans watch. that is reserved for the all yellow gold day/date in my book. also, do not agree that a chrono is primarily a tool watch. most people rarely, if at all, use the chrono function. its just another complication to most people, or a pleasant dial layout.

As I mentioned before as well, while it's a tool watch, never used it as one and it's all for the looks.
post #22795 of 48312
NS - awesome pics, and that sounds like a great day!
post #22796 of 48312
It's great to see people having a great time with family, minus in-laws where you escaped to gym, haha.

Jokes aside. Lovely dinner and wine, interesting 2 colored dial.
post #22797 of 48312
I know I'm pages tardy to the AP ROO party but the only ROO that over seemed vaguely attractive to me (and might still buy) was the Safari model. White face worked somehow better than usual on the hornback strap.

To wit:

post #22798 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by PartagasIV View Post

I know I'm pages tardy to the AP ROO party but the only ROO that over seemed vaguely attractive to me (and might still buy) was the Safari model. White face worked somehow better than usual on the hornback strap.

To wit:


Nah. Looks like lots of other ROOs, does nothing for me. The only Offshore that would possibly interest me and is a bit different, is the Scuba. However, it would need to be on a bracelet. But if the Safari puts a smile on your face, go for it!
post #22799 of 48312

Sorry but I'm with Hayward, I give a solid thumbs up to orig. early Speedy's for ones collection. I think when one mentions this kind of watch, it would be a remiss not to mention orig. Heuer Carrera's or Autavia's.

 

I do think when one is ready to spend this kind of money on a watch that they should just focus on getting the orig. rather than a re-issue. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Devoti - 7/7/13 at 6:53pm
post #22800 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Hayward,



Thank's for the disclaimer about taking your post with a grain of salt, I had to. I often agree with your assessments of watches, but here...I simply can't.  If you are a newbie I can more easily understand the fascination and being drawn in by Omega's marketing, "This is the watch that passed their tests and went to the moon."  Yes, that may be true if you have one with Cal 321, but the current watch is simply not the same as what went to the moon.  So relying on the NASA test is like saying, you wanted the car with the highest top speed in the world so you bought a current Jaguar XK8...because according to a 1964 edition of Road & Track magazine they said an E-Type Jag was one of the fastest cars in the world.  It simply makes no sense.  I completely, understand the historic importance of the Omega Speedy Pro, and if you like the history behind the model, I can appreciate and understand that. But a roughly 45 year old test to justify the modern version doesn't make much sense.

Except that the 3570.50 has also seen EVA time, and will likely continue to do so. It's still the only watch qualified for EVA by NASA.



That ain't Skylab or the Apollo Soyuz in the background. It's the ISS.

Even the X33 isn't qualified for EVA due to the alarm diaphragm. If the Daytona were a better choice, I'm sure Putin could've stolen some for his Cosmonauts.

Keep in mind of course, I never said the Daytona wasn't an exquisite piece of craftsmanship. It is. But it certainly doesn't match my aesthetic. I keep thinking of celebrities and gangsters when I see one.

As for using the chronograph function, most the time it is indeed a toy. Nevertheless I have used it for real events including fairly mundane ones.

There's also the whole value for money equation. If I'm going to pay for five figures for a chronograph, I'm going to want a fly back or split second.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)