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 1585  

post #23761 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazimir View Post

 Regarding all this love for G-Shock, I remember the signature of a WIS member that made me sell most of the watches I liked, but didn't love.

 "Never put on your wrist something that isn't useful or beautiful to you"- quoting with large approximation.

The original quotation was by William Morris in 1880.

"If you want a golden rule that will fit everybody, this is it: Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful."
post #23762 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

So, something that I have been thinking about lately. Figured I would bring it up here. Vintage Rolex. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
With that lame intro finished, let me get to the meat of it. I was reading the 'dink the other day, and I remember coming across this article:

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/rolex-albino-daytona-ben-clymer

In it, it talks about the "legendary" albino Daytona. Here is a picture for posterity.

In this article, the writer states that in May 2008, the sale of Clapton's Albino Daytona realized the significant sum of $505,000. Five years prior to the 2008 sale, that SAME Daytona sold for $50,109. 1/10 of the price!

So, when I first laid my eyes on this rare beast, my first thought was "that is absolutely gorgeous." But then I took a step back. I was honest with myself. And I can honestly say that there is no way I would pay anything remotely near that amount. I do not find the albino Daytona nearly as aesthetically pleasing as the Paul Newman variety. And I had to ask myself. Taking away the rarity of the Paul Newman Daytona, and the Paul Newman connection--would I really want it as much as a current generation Rolex? Would I really forsake the technology increases and the increase in quality for the original?

I am at something of a crossroads. Do I really love vintage Rolex? Or is it just the allure? And, what is even more complicated... what if the market for vintage Rolex bottoms out? If I paid $12,000 for a Steve McQueen Explorer II, I think I would be a bit miffed if they started selling for 1/10, or even 1/5 of what they are selling for now.
Now, I think there are certain vintage Rolexes that really do appeal to me. I really do love the Steve McQueen Explorer. And the Paul Newman Daytona. The 1675 Pepsi. I have yet to take the plunge into vintage Rolex territory. I have thought about it, but it is difficult for me to think about forking over so much money for something that is at least technologically inferior (I mean not to flame here of course, so please excuse my phraseology) than what is available at retail. I guess I just wanted to spark some discussion more than anything.

As an aside, I definitely think that vintage Rolex, at least aesthetically, is preferable (generally) to the current lineup. And this post is coming from someone who fawns over vintage Rolex. And from one who really wants to pick up several vintage models. This is merely my attempt at spelling out my thought processes!
I think that's a common dilemma for anyone who's considering new vs. vintage, regardless of manufacturer.

There are many factors that go into choosing a watch, but I wouldn't let specifications put me off one I liked — particularly with Rolex, whose movements are some of the most proven and durable in the industry. Decades of empirical evidence attests to the soundness of their design and construction.

Also, the older movements offer more hands-on craftsmanship than the newer examples, and this holds true for almost every manufacturer. The skilled labour that went into watches designed and produced 40+ years ago just doesn't exist any more at a cost that's reasonable for a serial-production watch, so there's something special about the older ones.

One personal note about the technical inferiority of the older models: looks generally trump specifications. Mechanical watches have been inherently obsolete ever since reliable quartz came on the scene, so it hasn't been entirely about technology for quite some time. I appreciate the refinements that go into a modern movement like Rolex's Cal. 4130, but I also consider the older 15XX movements to be some of the best examples of their period as well. And they still reliably keep good time on the wrist, which is the main point. The quality is definitely there, and Rolex will still be providing parts and service for the 1500-series calibres for at least a few more decades.

It's a wearable connection to period of engineering history that won't be repeated; the same one that put men on the moon. The aeronautical masterpiece Boeing 747 was designed using similar techniques, and the basics were so solid that they continue to operate efficiently to this day without any plans of being phased out.


(drafting the Rolex 1500-series movement)

But I mostly just enjoy how the watch looks and wears:



I wear it for the same activities I'd use a new watch for; swimming, skiing, cycling, travelling... I just don't stress about its technical inferiority.
post #23763 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Thanks buddy! And I am going to have to check some G-Shocks out in person I guess smile.gif.

I see to keep adding them to my collection. up to three. 1 white, 1 black analog-ish one and 1 black all digital one. Good weekend/casual watch. Have no problem wearing it around the house doing projects, etc... for the price, its a great watch (however you measure such things....)
post #23764 of 48312
newC, excellent conversation you bring up.

i think that as far as straight aesthetics go, there are some vintage models i prefer and some current models i prefer. as far as movements go, ive never been a super expert in all that and dont really chase movements for the most part. i appreciate movements greatly, and sometimes aspects of a movement affect my decision, but i have never sought after a particular movement. ive never really been in the price point where that would be a decisive factor.

as far as these huge value jumps in the vintage market, that is usually entirely dependent on some factor of or rarity or other cause for desirability. could be the fact clapton owned it for example. the PN daytona i think is objectively a gorgeous model, but the value there is really only due to its history and the uncertainty behind it. with things like that i guess there is always the possibility of a decline in value, and if one is buying one solely as an investment piece, its probably not the soundest investment out there.
post #23765 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post

I'm pretty sure that it's this model:
It certainly looks like it, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

So, something that I have been thinking about lately. Figured I would bring it up here. Vintage Rolex.
I've had similar thoughts about finding it hard to justify the prices of vintage Rolexes. But in my case it's not that I find them inferior to modern models (I think Belligero makes a good point above), but more a case of just finding them too costly. 22 years ago I bought a new Sub 14060 for about $1700. Now, I've since come to appreciate the aesthetics of a matte dial 5513, but paying 4 times the price I did for something used, only to get a minor cosmetic upgrade (coupled with my unnatural aversion to not being the first owner), makes it hard to justify. Also, I'm not the type who'd want several nearly identical watches, so there'd be no room for two subs and since I have history with my old 14060 having worn it from Greenland to New Zealand, it makes it even harder.

Now, if I didn't have (almost) the Rolex I prefer, and if I was ok with their current pricing, I would almost certainly overcome my second hand phobia and go vintage as there's nothing in Rolex's current lineup I find value in.

Btw, Belligero that GMT is beautiful :-)
post #23766 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Thanks buddy! And I am going to have to check some G-Shocks out in person I guess smile.gif.

 

I checked THIS one out yesterday, from their Aviation line. 

 

 

 

 

Somewhat large?  Yes: Size of case/total weight -> 54.1 x 52.4 x 16.4mm / 118g

 

Totally over-engineered for anyone except a Navy SEAL, I think:

 

Multi-Band Atomic Timekeeping (US, UK, Germany, Japan, China)
Receives time calibration radio signals which keep the displayed time accurate
Auto receive function (up to 6 times per day/up to 5 times per day for China)
Manual receive function
Signal: US WWVB, UK MSF, Germany DCF77, Japan JJY40/JJY60, China BPC
Frequency: US 60kHz, UK 60kHz, Germany 77.5kHz, Japan 40/60kHz, BPC 68.5kHz

  • Tough Solar Power
  • Shock Resistant
  • Triple G Resistant
  • Tough Movement
  • Auto hand home position correction
  • 200M Water Resistant
  • Neo-brite luminous hands and markers
  • Thermometer
    Display range: -10 to 60 C (14 to 140 F)
    Display unit: 1 C (2 F)
  • World Time
    29 times zones (29 cities + UTC), city code display, daylight saving on/off, home city/world time swapping)
  • Beeper Alarm
  • 1/20 second chronograph
    Measuring capacity: 1:59'59.95"
    Measuring modes: Elapsed time
    Other: Fly back
  • Countdown Timer
    Measuring unit: 1 second
    Countdown range: 60 minutes
    Countdown start time setting range: 1 to 60 minutes (1-minute increments)
  • Full Auto-Calendar (pre-programmed until the year 2099)
  • Day/Date Display
  • 12/24 Hour Formats
  • Accuracy: +/- 15 seconds per month (with no signal calibration)
  • Storage Battery: Solar Rechargeable Battery
  • Low Battery Warning
  • Power Saving Function
  • Approx. Battery Life: 6 months on full charge (without further exposure to light)
  • Module: 5240

 

(Although that thermometer could come in handy if one of my daughters was running a fever...)

 

Already one of their higher priced models at $600: http://www.gshock.com/watches/Aviation/GWA1000FC-2A

 

I think this is just a passing fancy on my part, so I will continue to investigate and check out the wares but the fact that I haven't pulled the trigger given the price point and after seeing one on my wrist (and it ain't half bad either) probably - fingers crossed - means I will do without it.  Whooooooooooooooooooooooa!!!!

post #23767 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

About a Cheap Watch

 

Funny, I thought when I finally posted in here about buying a new watch, it would be for me, and something with a little more "TWAT-cred".  But first, this.

 

My son  is fourteen years old.  He's a good boy and I'm proud of him.  He's not especially interested in watches (then again, neither was I until a year ago..damn you, TWAT!)

 

However, he was intrigued by the idea of my father's old Omega, that I repaired last year, and have worn since (and, fatally, shared here...damn you, TWAT!).  A few months ago, I gave him an old quartz watch that I'd had years ago, when I wasn't much older than him.  He liked the idea of being handed down something, however simple.  But that watch has seen it's last days as a functioning timepiece, and although it might follow him around for the rest of his days as a rusting curio (if he's anything like me), it turns out that it's no longer fit for wearing.

 

Now, I've been thinking for a while that I should replace that with something he can actually wear. 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 I have been away for a long time without seeing him or his sisters, and will get back to them in the next couple of days for some long-anticipated time together - perfect time for a surprise gift.  I did consider giving him my existing beater/back-up quartz, or even my bizarre dictator-kitsch Saddam Hussein Rodania.  But the former isn't very special, and the latter not very wearable.  So, I thought I'd buy one.

 

To be honest, it's been a shitty year for business, I've not had the cash for many treats (mine or theirs!), and the green shoots of recovery are only just appearing.  Also, he got a tiny birthday present compared to his sisters', without  a hint of complaint.  So, with modest income restored and positive signs appearing for the future, it was time for a little gift that's been overdue to him, and today I went shopping.

 

The brief was pretty simple: I wanted a mechanical watch - his first "proper" watch, that was cheap enough for a young boy to wear regularly (i.e. potentially scratch and break!), but not Chinese.  Enter the ubiquitous ETA.  I wanted a bracelet for practicality, a  simple, manly design that would still be wearable years from now (no novelty bright-coloured Sub imitiations etc), and a price that reflected the generic nature of the movement rather than some inflated sense of brand value.  One obvious answer would have been Swatch's automatic range, which are very cheap.  But I also wanted it to come in a proper box that looked like it was worth keeping, encouraging him to value the maintenance of the whole package for posterity - and perhaps add to it later on.  The Swatch wasn't "proper" enough, somehow - though I did pick up a couple of quartz ones for the girls so they don't feel left out!

 

Where I ended up was this: about $400 from the AD. (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 I have to say it felt pleasingly solid in the hand for that price, and the design, modest-but-real brand and overall presentation seemed just the thing to whet his interest and let him feel this was something worth taking care of - without breaking the bank.  

 

Any sage advice / callous cries of "fool"?  Give it to me straight!  I can't help but wonder  after reading the last couple of pages, if I should have got him a G-Shock and I'm instead imposing my conservative tastes!  But then again he did like his suede brogues...and this, I hope, he won't outgrow.

 

 

Mimo, well done!  Great hearing about the next generation of watch nuts growing into the hobby.  I have lots of great memories of watch research, reconnaissance, and shopping with my Dad, both for his watches and mine.  I hope he enjoys it, and that you will continue to enjoy this crazy hobby of ours with the added benefit of eventually having another SF'er (one in your own home) to bounce watch ideas off of.  Great job!  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post

I think that's a common dilemma for anyone who's considering new vs. vintage, regardless of manufacturer.

There are many factors that go into choosing a watch, but I wouldn't let specifications put me off one I liked — particularly with Rolex, whose movements are some of the most proven and durable in the industry. Decades of empirical evidence attests to the soundness of their design and construction.

Also, the older movements offer more hands-on craftsmanship than the newer examples, and this holds true for almost every manufacturer. The skilled labour that went into watches designed and produced 40+ years ago just doesn't exist any more at a cost that's reasonable for a serial-production watch, so there's something special about the older ones.

One personal note about the technical inferiority of the older models: looks generally trump specifications. Mechanical watches have been inherently obsolete ever since reliable quartz came on the scene, so it hasn't been entirely about technology for quite some time. I appreciate the refinements that go into a modern movement like Rolex's Cal. 4130, but I also consider the older 15XX movements to be some of the best examples of their period as well. And they still reliably keep good time on the wrist, which is the main point. The quality is definitely there, and Rolex will still be providing parts and service for the 1500-series calibres for at least a few more decades.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)


It's a wearable connection to period of engineering history that won't be repeated; the same one that put men on the moon. The aeronautical masterpiece Boeing 747 was designed using similar techniques, and the basics were so solid that they continue to operate efficiently to this day without any plans of being phased out.


(drafting the Rolex 1500-series movement)

But I mostly just enjoy how the watch looks and wears:



I wear it for the same activities I'd use a new watch for; swimming, skiing, cycling, travelling... I just don't stress about its technical inferiority.

 

+1

 

I agree with all that Belligero has stated.  Particularly with Rolex, you will see more hand workmanship on vintage models, than what you will see on modern pieces.  Sure there are some great advancements in production (allowing companies to make more watches efficiently), and technological advancements in materials such as ceramics, carbon fiber, and using springs that are largely anti-magnetic.  But in the grand scheme of things, I don't find the technological advance, make me happier, make me appreciate a watch more, or make my older watches seem deficient.  Production advances only help the manufacturers in terms of speeding up what they can make, and when I see current prices it doesn't seem any savings get passed on to me.  As for the use of new materials, Carbon Fiber just seems like a politically correct and fancy way of saying plastic.  Sure its light and strong, and makes sense in racing cars, but I don't find it appealing on watches.  Ceramic, sure its scratch proof, but we've seen that it can still be damaged or shatter.  The old aluminum bezel inserts could be scratched or dented, but they would still function, and they were less expensive and easier to replace.  Beyond, that the colors available on the aluminum, the pepsi, the coke, the root beer, blue Sub, the green of the LV, seemed deeper, richer and more attractive to me than the modern ceramic green, or blue of current Subs.  The only modern colored bezel I like so far is the Blue Black GMT2. 

 

I own a modern 116250 with Cal 4130, and it out performs my El Primero based 16520 in terms of advancements, power reserve, ease of service (not that I service the watch), seeing the luminous markings.  Yet, the 16520 has more hand workmanship, was made in smaller batches because of the hand workmanship, and I find the dials more attractive.  There is a place in my collection and heart for each but for different reasons.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

newC, excellent conversation you bring up.

i think that as far as straight aesthetics go, there are some vintage models i prefer and some current models i prefer. as far as movements go, ive never been a super expert in all that and dont really chase movements for the most part. i appreciate movements greatly, and sometimes aspects of a movement affect my decision, but i have never sought after a particular movement. ive never really been in the price point where that would be a decisive factor.

as far as these huge value jumps in the vintage market, that is usually entirely dependent on some factor of or rarity or other cause for desirability. could be the fact clapton owned it for example. the PN daytona i think is objectively a gorgeous model, but the value there is really only due to its history and the uncertainty behind it. with things like that i guess there is always the possibility of a decline in value, and if one is buying one solely as an investment piece, its probably not the soundest investment out there.

+1 another great post.

 

I do appreciate movements.  Once one is in a certain price range, I don't want to feel that I am wearing simply a more polished version of the same movement that is sitting in someone's $1,000 watch if I am wearing something that is substantially more expensive.  It would be like finding out that the engine in a new Porsche Turbo is simply a chromed version of what is in someone's Kia.  Each car has a job to do, but I would feel like I was being ripped off if that is what I found was under the hood of a Porsche that is drastically more expensive.  That being said, I try to choose my watches/movements carefully.  Still I can enjoy wearing my 12 year old Rolex 16570 Ex2 with a rather simply finished movement, just as I can enjoy wearing my 15202 Jumbo with cal 2121.  Hell, cal. 2121 has been around for about 4 decades and is still celebrated as a great movement even if it doesn't have the technological advances of the latest Rolex.

 

Celebrity ownership often affects values drastically.  An early 1960's Ferrari 250 Lusso owned by Steve McQueen sold for around $2 Million dollars within the last few years and it was brown.  Really nice 250 Lussos in far more desirable colors sell for 1.2-1.4 million.  Documented celebrity ownership, by a popular person always drives the price up when it comes to collectors.  Personally, I'm not sure owning something that belonged to a famous person would mean enough to me to pay a premium.  I would rather have a pristine NOS item with all boxes and papers rather than something banged around by a celebrity.  In the end, rarity will always pay a role, and on some level again, that ties into celebrity ownership.  How many albino Daytonas can someone say are or were owned by Clapton or other celebrities.  In the end what drives collectors is only known in the heart and mind of each collector.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

So, something that I have been thinking about lately. Figured I would bring it up here. Vintage Rolex.

With that lame intro finished, let me get to the meat of it. I was reading the 'dink the other day, and I remember coming across this article:

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/rolex-albino-daytona-ben-clymer

In it, it talks about the "legendary" albino Daytona. Here is a picture for posterity.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)




In this article, the writer states that in May 2008, the sale of Clapton's Albino Daytona realized the significant sum of $505,000. Five years prior to the 2008 sale, that SAME Daytona sold for $50,109. 1/10 of the price!

So, when I first laid my eyes on this rare beast, my first thought was "that is absolutely gorgeous." But then I took a step back. I was honest with myself. And I can honestly say that there is no way I would pay anything remotely near that amount. I do not find the albino Daytona nearly as aesthetically pleasing as the Paul Newman variety. And I had to ask myself. Taking away the rarity of the Paul Newman Daytona, and the Paul Newman connection--would I really want it as much as a current generation Rolex? Would I really forsake the technology increases and the increase in quality for the original?

I am at something of a crossroads. Do I really love vintage Rolex? Or is it just the allure? And, what is even more complicated... what if the market for vintage Rolex bottoms out? If I paid $12,000 for a Steve McQueen Explorer II, I think I would be a bit miffed if they started selling for 1/10, or even 1/5 of what they are selling for now.

Now, I think there are certain vintage Rolexes that really do appeal to me. I really do love the Steve McQueen Explorer. And the Paul Newman Daytona. The 1675 Pepsi. I have yet to take the plunge into vintage Rolex territory. I have thought about it, but it is difficult for me to think about forking over so much money for something that is at least technologically inferior (I mean not to flame here of course, so please excuse my phraseology) than what is available at retail. I guess I just wanted to spark some discussion more than anything.

As an aside, I definitely think that vintage Rolex, at least aesthetically, is preferable (generally) to the current lineup. And this post is coming from someone who fawns over vintage Rolex. And from one who really wants to pick up several vintage models. This is merely my attempt at spelling out my thought processes!

 

I'm not a fan of the Albino Daytona.  I'd rather have either a PN or or vintage Panda.  I think when you talk about vintage anything, it goes beyond technology.  It goes into having something rare that not everyone has.  Anyone can walk into a current Rolex dealer and buy any model and then can have it for you pretty quickly.  You have to do a bit more than that to get a good vintage Orange Hand Ex2 or PN Daytona.  Its also something you won't see on about a dozen people's wrists as you walk through the streets of Manhattan, LA, or Chicago.  

 

If someone is buying vintage, its about buying something that has survived decades, that may have some battle scars, because they were bought when people wore watches and didn't save them for investment purposes.  So really good ones often take time to locate.  I think if someone buys what they true adore, they won't be disappointed with the value if it only stays stable or it declines.   Not everyone will like our choices, and markets for a variety of items is fickle.  Resale value does become a consideration to many people, particularly if an item is very costly.  However, it should not be the primary factor in one's decisions.   If you bought it for yourself, you wore it and enjoyed it, then you got your money's worth.

post #23768 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

 

I checked THIS one out yesterday, from their Aviation line. 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

Somewhat large?  Yes: Size of case/total weight -> 54.1 x 52.4 x 16.4mm / 118g

 

Totally over-engineered for anyone except a Navy SEAL, I think:

 

Multi-Band Atomic Timekeeping (US, UK, Germany, Japan, China)
Receives time calibration radio signals which keep the displayed time accurate
Auto receive function (up to 6 times per day/up to 5 times per day for China)
Manual receive function
Signal: US WWVB, UK MSF, Germany DCF77, Japan JJY40/JJY60, China BPC
Frequency: US 60kHz, UK 60kHz, Germany 77.5kHz, Japan 40/60kHz, BPC 68.5kHz

  • Tough Solar Power
  • Shock Resistant
  • Triple G Resistant
  • Tough Movement
  • Auto hand home position correction
  • 200M Water Resistant
  • Neo-brite luminous hands and markers
  • Thermometer
    Display range: -10 to 60 C (14 to 140 F)
    Display unit: 1 C (2 F)
  • World Time
    29 times zones (29 cities + UTC), city code display, daylight saving on/off, home city/world time swapping)
  • Beeper Alarm
  • 1/20 second chronograph
    Measuring capacity: 1:59'59.95"
    Measuring modes: Elapsed time
    Other: Fly back
  • Countdown Timer
    Measuring unit: 1 second
    Countdown range: 60 minutes
    Countdown start time setting range: 1 to 60 minutes (1-minute increments)
  • Full Auto-Calendar (pre-programmed until the year 2099)
  • Day/Date Display
  • 12/24 Hour Formats
  • Accuracy: +/- 15 seconds per month (with no signal calibration)
  • Storage Battery: Solar Rechargeable Battery
  • Low Battery Warning
  • Power Saving Function
  • Approx. Battery Life: 6 months on full charge (without further exposure to light)
  • Module: 5240

 

(Although that thermometer could come in handy if one of my daughters was running a fever...)

 

Already one of their higher priced models at $600: http://www.gshock.com/watches/Aviation/GWA1000FC-2A

 

I think this is just a passing fancy on my part, so I will continue to investigate and check out the wares but the fact that I haven't pulled the trigger given the price point and after seeing one on my wrist (and it ain't half bad either) probably - fingers crossed - means I will do without it.  Whooooooooooooooooooooooa!!!!

 

 

While I think a G-shock could serve a valuable place in someone's life as a rugged beater, I don't think I'd spend a lot of money on one.  Sure its far from Rolex, Omega, or Breitling watches, but I can't see spending $600 on a plastic digital watch...but that's just me.  If it puts a smile on your face when you try it on go for it!

post #23769 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

While I think a G-shock could serve a valuable place in someone's life as a rugged beater, I don't think I'd spend a lot of money on one.  Sure its far from Rolex, Omega, or Breitling watches, but I can't see spending $600 on a plastic digital watch...but that's just me.  If it puts a smile on your face when you try it on go for it!

 

Current retail prices at the Casio website ranges from $70 to $600, with secondary market prices all over the place. 

 

But yeah, I'm really not sure I'll get myself one.

post #23770 of 48312
great stuff al always, dino. fing02[1].gif
post #23771 of 48312


EDIT: revised meme generator to something potentially more humorous and less offensive.
Edited by Keith T - 8/6/13 at 8:37pm
post #23772 of 48312

Kaplan, keep in mind that $1700 in 1991 is just over 5 grand today with inflation today, so you really wouldn't be paying 4x.

post #23773 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

While I think a G-shock could serve a valuable place in someone's life as a rugged beater, I don't think I'd spend a lot of money on one.  Sure its far from Rolex, Omega, or Breitling watches, but I can't see spending $600 on a plastic digital watch...but that's just me.  If it puts a smile on your face when you try it on go for it!


Agreed. Some of the G-Shocks are outrageous. I used to own a "simple" one years ago. I wore it around the house, something that my dog would bite when we played and I wouldn't care. Now it's been replaced by an Seiko 007, and I enjoy that far more as a beater. I have a running watch for any digital tool purposes anyway. Just my 2 pennies.

post #23774 of 48312
qubed, you're of course right (without checking the specific numbers) and if I didn't already had something to scratch my Rolex itch I would probably find a way to justify current prices. For now I have settled for admiring the 5513 from afar :-)
post #23775 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

I checked THIS one out yesterday, from their Aviation line.  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)





Somewhat large?  Yes: Size of case/total weight -> 54.1 x 52.4 x 16.4mm / 118g

Totally over-engineered for anyone except a Navy SEAL, I think:

Multi-Band Atomic Timekeeping (US, UK, Germany, Japan, China)

Receives time calibration radio signals which keep the displayed time accurate

Auto receive function (up to 6 times per day/up to 5 times per day for China)

Manual receive function

Signal: US WWVB, UK MSF, Germany DCF77, Japan JJY40/JJY60, China BPC

Frequency: US 60kHz, UK 60kHz, Germany 77.5kHz, Japan 40/60kHz, BPC 68.5kHz
  • Tough Solar Power
  • Shock Resistant
  • Triple G Resistant
  • Tough Movement
  • Auto hand home position correction
  • 200M Water Resistant
  • Neo-brite luminous hands and markers
  • Thermometer

    Display range: -10 to 60 C (14 to 140 F)

    Display unit: 1 C (2 F)
  • World Time

    29 times zones (29 cities + UTC), city code display, daylight saving on/off, home city/world time swapping)
  • Beeper Alarm
  • 1/20 second chronograph

    Measuring capacity: 1:59'59.95"

    Measuring modes: Elapsed time

    Other: Fly back
  • Countdown Timer

    Measuring unit: 1 second

    Countdown range: 60 minutes

    Countdown start time setting range: 1 to 60 minutes (1-minute increments)
  • Full Auto-Calendar (pre-programmed until the year 2099)
  • Day/Date Display
  • 12/24 Hour Formats
  • Accuracy: +/- 15 seconds per month (with no signal calibration)
  • Storage Battery: Solar Rechargeable Battery
  • Low Battery Warning
  • Power Saving Function
  • Approx. Battery Life: 6 months on full charge (without further exposure to light)
  • Module: 5240

(Although that thermometer could come in handy if one of my daughters was running a fever...)

Already one of their higher priced models at $600: http://www.gshock.com/watches/Aviation/GWA1000FC-2A
I think this is just a passing fancy on my part, so I will continue to investigate and check out the wares but the fact that I haven't pulled the trigger given the price point and after seeing one on my wrist (and it ain't half bad either) probably - fingers crossed - means I will do without it.  Whooooooooooooooooooooooa!!!!
Regrets, Frilly — and you know I love ya — but when I see one of those over-the-top wrist computers, I don't picture "badass Navy SEAL", I picture "Dwight Schrute":



Of course, that might just be due my general impression of the type of humourless forum person that gets a bit TOO into his Casios/Seikos and completely loses connection with reality. On the other hand, you do have some rather decent watches and write amusing stuff, so there's no real risk in going for their most convoluted gadget... probably.

But have you seen the instruction manual for one of those things? They're typically the size of a Russian novel! It's cool that it tells you what temperature your wrist is and everything, but it seems a bit, y'know, much. Granted, Gs have never been about subtlety , but I'd just get one of their simple, tough and legible semi-normal models instead of wasting time reading tiny print trying to figure out how to set that damned thing.

The whole point of a G-Shock is to completely not give a shit about it.
Edited by Belligero - 8/6/13 at 9:18am
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...)