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 1561  

post #23401 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerP View Post

The odds of my next watch being a Rolex just went up.  In the metal, this thing rocks the house.  I just wish it came with the same cool glidelock adjustable bracelet as the Sub C.



Yup! I made the mistake of trying one on a couple of days ago. Beautiful piece but I think it would make a great second watch
post #23402 of 48312
#symmetricize4life

Also with you on that pointer date on the JLC...nice execution IMO.....indeed, a rare disagreement with Dino. Horses for courses.
post #23403 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post


I know I am an outlier and most people don't share my dislike for simple date indicators. I certainly don't expect to convince anyone, though I know I am right!!! But just in case I wasn't clear - it really bugs me that the simple date function, is BY DESIGN, wrong half the months of the year. I know collectors don't really care since most don't have autowinders running constantly so must constantly reset their watches frequently. But to my mind, a functional watch should be one which you can set once and forget about. It should not lose or gain a meaningful amount of time and you should be able to ignore it, other than servicing it every x years. If it gains or loses too much time, that is considered either out of spec or else a design flaw and one that the maker tries to improve upon. It would annoy you if you constantly had to fix the time because it was inaccurate. Likewise, it should bother you that the date is inaccurate and especially that it is inaccurate on purpose. To me, this is just bad engineering; if you can't make it work properly, leave it out. But something that is broken on purpose feels like a splinter in my brain. On those watches I have with a date function, I simply never set it and try to pretend it isn't there.

But I know no one else really cares.


I agree with you 100%. The concept irritates me, but I still own (or have owned) some watches with date features.

post #23404 of 48312
This is the gospel.

Henceforth, simple date functions will be described correctly. It is not a date function. It is a new complication called a Day Counter, and most, by convention happen to go to 31 days. If you want to use them to keep track of the date for a few days, great, though it gets wonky towards the end of some months. if you want to keep track of how many days your wife or SO (or you) has been in shark week, great - they are good for that, too. Set it when your kid runs away from home so you know when five days are up and you can inform the police - an excellent use. Just don't call the Day Counter a date function, because it isn't.
post #23405 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I know I am an outlier and most people don't share my dislike for simple date indicators. I certainly don't expect to convince anyone, though I know I am right!!! But just in case I wasn't clear - it really bugs me that the simple date function, is BY DESIGN, wrong half the months of the year. I know collectors don't really care since most don't have autowinders running constantly so must constantly reset their watches frequently. But to my mind, a functional watch should be one which you can set once and forget about. It should not lose or gain a meaningful amount of time and you should be able to ignore it, other than servicing it every x years. If it gains or loses too much time, that is considered either out of spec or else a design flaw and one that the maker tries to improve upon. It would annoy you if you constantly had to fix the time because it was inaccurate. Likewise, it should bother you that the date is inaccurate and especially that it is inaccurate on purpose. To me, this is just bad engineering; if you can't make it work properly, leave it out. But something that is broken on purpose feels like a splinter in my brain. On those watches I have with a date function, I simply never set it and try to pretend it isn't there.
But I know no one else really cares.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
This is the gospel.
Henceforth, simple date functions will be described correctly. It is not a date function. It is a new complication called a Day Counter, and most, by convention happen to go to 31 days. If you want to use them to keep track of the date for a few days, great, though it gets wonky towards the end of some months. if you want to keep track of how many days your wife or SO (or you) has been in shark week, great - they are good for that, too. Set it when your kid runs away from home so you know when five days are up and you can inform the police - an excellent use. Just don't call the Day Counter a date function, because it isn't.

i think you are asking a lot from a mechanical item. its not the watch makers fault that we have a retarded calendar.

the facts as i see it are two fold.

1. making a mechanical watch to fully account for all the changes in the calendar year and cycle is both difficult and costly. it can be done, but its not cheap. that is pretty much fact as far as i know.

2. a date on a watch is a very useful thing for many people, myself included. many people need to check the date throughout the day, and having it displayed on your wrist is the quickest and easiest way to make sure you have it right.

that being the case, i think that it is more than reasonable for a watch maker to use a date on their watch, so that its wearer can take advantage of that function, and they should do their best to incorporate said date in a way that is as aesthetically pleasing as possible.

if one can afford an AC or better yet a PC, that is great. but most cant, and that should not preclude them from having a date on their watch. a watch maker using a simple date function in this way gives a person the opportunity to have the date at the ready, and not break the bank. if that means that 5 times a year you spend 10 seconds changing the date, i think that really is a small penance. and is in no way bad engineering. its utilitarian and economical engineering imo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

#symmetricize4life

Also with you on that pointer date on the JLC...nice execution IMO.....indeed, a rare disagreement with Dino. Horses for courses.

inlove.gif
post #23406 of 48312
If you want to use a Day Counter as a clumsy proxy for the date, that is OK with me. It is a fine use of the function, as long as you remember to reset it every so often.
post #23407 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

If you want to use a Day Counter as a clumsy proxy for the date, that is fine with me. It is a fine use of the function, as long as you remember to reset it every so often.

plain.gif
post #23408 of 48312
You should get a day counter that is marked for seven days followed by a bunch of smiley faces.
post #23409 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

I know I am an outlier and most people don't share my dislike for simple date indicators. I certainly don't expect to convince anyone, though I know I am right!!! But just in case I wasn't clear - it really bugs me that the simple date function is, BY DESIGN, wrong half the months of the year. I know collectors don't really care since most don't have autowinders running constantly so must constantly reset their watches frequently for reasons other than the only-semi-functional date mechanism. But to my mind, a functional watch should be one which you can set once and forget about. It should not lose or gain a meaningful amount of time and you should be able to ignore it, other than servicing it every x years. If it gains or loses too much time, that is considered either out of spec or else a design flaw and one that the maker tries to improve upon. It would annoy you if you constantly had to fix the time because it was inaccurate. Likewise, it should bother you that the date is inaccurate and especially that it is inaccurate on purpose. To me, this is just bad engineering; if you can't make it work properly, leave it out. But something that is broken on purpose feels like a splinter in my brain. On those watches I have with a date function, I simply never set it and try to pretend it isn't there.

But I know no one else really cares.

Hi Dopey.  I get what you are saying.  When I said that it was a funny way to look at it, I was not making fun of you or disagreeing.  I was merely noting, that you hit upon a rather interesting point I had not considered.  What you said is correct,  it made me laugh a little, but I like your line of reasoning.  I can appreciate where you are coming from, and I think its important to remember as watch collectors and SFers we tend to be more particular about design, function, and aesthetics than maybe an average person that just goes into an shop and buys one Rolex, Omega, Breitling, etc with the intention that it will be his only good watch for the rest of his life.  I do have some watches with dates on them,  and I can live with it being on most of them. However, your statement might make me give the whole simple date thing a bit more thought next time I am considering a watch...although I might be able to suffer with it on a Blue Black GMT 2 .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

#symmetricize4life

Also with you on that pointer date on the JLC...nice execution IMO.....indeed, a rare disagreement with Dino. Horses for courses.

As for you guys disagreeing with me...its ok with me if you want to be wrong once in a while wink.gif 

post #23410 of 48312

Neither of the ADs within a short distance have received a BLNR.   This thread is a tease.

post #23411 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

You should get a day counter that is marked for seven days followed by a bunch of smiley faces.

smile.gifsmile.gifsmile.gifsmile.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

...an average person that just goes into an shop and buys one Rolex, Omega, Breitling, etc with the intention that it will be his only good watch for the rest of his life....

does. not. compute. brain. overload. hurts. so. much.
Quote:
although I might be able to suffer with it on a Blue Black GMT 2 .

yeah you could!
Quote:
As for you guys disagreeing with me...its ok with me if you want to be wrong once in a while wink.gif
 

foo.gif
post #23412 of 48312
Minority opinion - I don't dislike this watch biggrin.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

Remember this one?

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/patek-philippe-creates-unique-5004-split-seconds-perpetual-calendar-in-titanium-for-only-watch-2013

With this press image?




Actual pics now available via Antiquorum's site, not just for Patek but for every watch maker creating a unique piece:

http://www.antiquorum.com/press-releases/antiquorum-presents-the-first-hands-on-images-of-timepieces-offered-in-only-watch-2013/

Here are the pics for the PP 5004T:










Just sharing!

Damn awesome photo, the center links almost look brushed. ALMOST. Can't wait to see one in person, either. My man this would make a fine first Rolex for you I think

Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerP View Post

The odds of my next watch being a Rolex just went up.  In the metal, this thing rocks the house.  I just wish it came with the same cool glidelock adjustable bracelet as the Sub C.



Dopey

Your requirements then exclude 99.999999% of autos with dates. You clearly don't miss the date and that's great. For me, I feel my watches are incomplete without the date, because I'm such a habit whore that I constantly look at my watch for the date. It may be OCD'ish of me, but I can't live without one. I don't mind having to wind the crown a few times to set the date every other month. No more than I would, oh I don't know, mind winding a manual watch every day. But some people swear by manual winds and I get it.

I guess there's always G-shock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

I know I am an outlier and most people don't share my dislike for simple date indicators. I certainly don't expect to convince anyone, though I know I am right!!! But just in case I wasn't clear - it really bugs me that the simple date function is, BY DESIGN, wrong half the months of the year. I know collectors don't really care since most don't have autowinders running constantly so must constantly reset their watches frequently for reasons other than the only-semi-functional date mechanism. But to my mind, a functional watch should be one which you can set once and forget about. It should not lose or gain a meaningful amount of time and you should be able to ignore it, other than servicing it every x years. If it gains or loses too much time, that is considered either out of spec or else a design flaw and one that the maker tries to improve upon. It would annoy you if you constantly had to fix the time because it was inaccurate. Likewise, it should bother you that the date is inaccurate and especially that it is inaccurate on purpose. To me, this is just bad engineering; if you can't make it work properly, leave it out. But something that is broken on purpose feels like a splinter in my brain. On those watches I have with a date function, I simply never set it and try to pretend it isn't there.

But I know no one else really cares.
post #23413 of 48312
While the JLC MUT Moon Phase still beckons... a dress watch isn't necessary for my current job etc. Maybe I've caught foo.gif syndrome, but I've been thinking of a "one watch" for now. I currently have my Watchco SM300, but am considering something along the lines of an older Datejust with silver dial/baton markers. I'm not sold on the newer ones, but trying one on might change my mind. Suggestions/opinions welcome.
Edited by cyc wid it - 7/25/13 at 2:59pm
post #23414 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

Minority opinion - I don't dislike this watch biggrin.gif

tbh, if they just got rid of the "woven" dial and made it straight gray or black, i wouldnt hate it myself.
Quote:
Damn awesome photo, the center links almost look brushed. ALMOST. Can't wait to see one in person, either. My man this would make a fine first Rolex for you I think

in person, the center links are very clearly polished. that pic just doesnt show it. but, i like the polished center links.
Quote:
Dopey
I guess there's always G-shock.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)



Quote:
Originally Posted by cyc wid it View Post

While the JLC MUT Moon Phase still beckons... a dress watch isn't necessary for my current job etc. Maybe I've caught foo.gif syndrome, but I've been thinking of a "one watch" for now. I currently have my Watchco SM300, but am considering something along the lines of an older Datejust with silver dial/baton markers. I'm not sold on the newer ones, but trying one on might change my mind. Suggestions/opinions welcome.

a classic vintage DJ with stick markers is a great one watch.
post #23415 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

inlove.gif  That's a hot watch!  I haven't been into a Rolex dealer in a while, so I've yet to see one in person.  If I get a chance I may pop into an AD to see if I can get a look at one.  The Breitling chronograph you posted the other day was quite nice...but I'd rather have the blue/black GMT...just my 2 cents. 

 

 

I quite agree.

 

On the great date debate - I go both ways, so to speak.  I don't wish any of my no-date watches had a date function, nor do I wish to delete the date function from any of my watches so equipped.  It's definitely NOT something I need, though.  I also sign and date a number of documents in a single day, but find I can pretty much remember the date after the first one.  Frankly, I'd be kind of worried it I couldn't.  And it's sitting at the bottom right hand corner of my computer screen all day, every day, just a glance away.

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...)