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 1889  

post #28321 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by zippyh View Post

Dibs on your cordovans.

Haha I'm just getting started on real watches, got my Hamilton khaki last week


And would probably get nomos then maybe this one if I could find it:

One pair of Saint Crispins I can live without. Not sure if I can live without rare horse butt!
post #28322 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbonbasted View Post

For a sportier watch I think I would go bigger. For instance, if I this were my third or fourth watch, I'd entertain something that fit larger. However, for a daily wearer, I still think I want something more conservative and in proportion to my wrist. That said, the idea of "proportion" is very much in the eye of the beholder, so while some may think it looks perfect, others will scoff. I was just more surprised by the SA's insistence that I was wrong about a smaller face being the right play.

Per the hip hop comment, I certainly don't want to come off as obtuse. However, at least where I live, the large face crowds are more often than not going for that look. So perhaps I have a hard time separating that in my mind.

And I completely agree with the comment about Tourneau. I was baffled there were people in there actually paying for watches...

BTW, both your IWC and Vass look great icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

Thanks! Oh yes, I completely agree with you that for a daily you want something smaller. I think the 41mm Royal Oak is the max size that I could tolerate under the cuff and with a suit/sport coat.
post #28323 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by suaviter View Post

Agreed 100%.  I would look for vintage 1960's Omegas - the one I have fits the bill of what you're looking for.

Going vintage, something like this would certainly fit the bill:

omegasixties.jpg

(Found that pic in the 4 year old thread where I last asked around for this kind of watch.)
post #28324 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevent View Post


Haha I'm just getting started on real watches, got my Hamilton khaki last week


And would probably get nomos then maybe this one if I could find it:

One pair of Saint Crispins I can live without. Not sure if I can live without rare horse butt!

 

Looks good!  I have the same watch (Hamilton) and wore it yesterday.  It takes a beating and keeps on ticking.

post #28325 of 48312
kalplan that is stunning. id love to have that watch but in gold.
post #28326 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRK33 View Post


The 15202 is definitely amazing and agreed it is more versatile as it easily straddles the line of sporty and dressy. I am fortunate enough to own one and it is my favorite watch hands down. icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif We should all enable you to pick one up. I can easily see it being someone's one watch (as long as they are reasonably careful with their watches).

And you are spot on regarding the VC Patrimony Small Seconds -- I really love that watch as well and one I considered carefully. Ultimately, I would have wanted a white gold case with the platinum version's slate grey dial. The platinum version is just too pricey in my book. The Aub/Auf just strikes me as a perfect dress watch -- enough visual interest to differentiate from the dress watch pack and I really think it is another classic from Lange.
 

+1  

 

I agree, especially about working to enable him to pick up a 15202!  There really wasn't much in terms of new releases that truly peaked my interests.  While the incredibly complicated pieces are cool and are often a way to show a company's technical abilities and imagination, they are often priced at astronomical levels that only the wealthiest of collectors can afford. Oh, well, hopefully there will be some interesting offerings at Basel.  

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbonbasted View Post

Went to Tourneau yesterday to try on the Mark XVII for the first time. I have held off up to this point because I was afraid I would fall in love on the spot. However, I was having my sunglasses repaired and had time to kill, so I popped in. Some takeaways:

The face is big. While I don't have the largest wrists in the world, I'm usually fine up to 41mm (worth nothing that both the XV and XVI look great on me). The XVII is measured at 41mm, so I figured it would be fine. Not the case at all. I'd say it's closer to 43mm or 44mm when worn. It's just too big and really takes away from the understated class that is so readily evident on the XV and XVI. And while I really like the red accent on the face, it really is not worth looking like a hip hop impresario. Again, I'm not a big guy, so this is just how it looked on me.

More surprising than how strikingly big it wore was the SA's insistence that it was the perfect size for me. He even made a play to have me look at the Big Pilots, which are way larger. I was very surprised to see how hard the guy pressed about it. He said that for an old man a smaller face was right, but that someone younger needed the statement. Needless to say I was pretty turned off by that point. I know we're (largely) a bastion of conservatism here, but I was still shocked at how hard he was pushing the bigger face. And it got me thinking whether or not bigger faces are a trend that makers are trying to cash in on now so that five years down the road, when you realize your watch has been too big all along, you come back to but something sub-42. Looking through Tourneau's offerings, most of the entry-level watches were bigger that 40mm. Just food for thought.

...

All-in-all I went from being sure that the XVII was the watch for me to ruling it out altogether. I plan on taking a closer look at the XV and XVI moving forward. Just figured I'd share if anyone else was entertaining the idea...

Sadly, I'm not surprised.  I find their SA's there uninformed, pushy, unprofessional, and generally a waste of my time.  That BS about going with a smaller watch if you are older, but because of your age you need a large watch to make a statement is completely ridiculous.  That's just a bunch of sales talk.  

 

I agree with TC, that there are brands that have always made larger watches, and have continued to do so for historic reasons.  However, there are a good number of brands that have all increased their watch case sizes to follow the larger watch trend.  This is true of even some of the top brands such as Patek, AP, and VC.  Years ago Calatravas were around 32-34mm.  Now the smallest I believe is around 35 and they make some that are 38 mm.  This is not a new trend, its been going on for 10+ years.  In the end, its important to find what you like, what works with your needs and your sense of style.  Its the same as buying a suit, not every cut or maker is right for every person.  Some are a better fit for some people both physically and in terms of their sense of style.  Find the right one for you and regardless of how the watch size trend goes, you will have a watch that you will enjoy for a very long time.

 

Good luck with your journey to choosing the right watch. 

post #28327 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

+1  

I agree with TC, that there are brands that have always made larger watches, and have continued to do so for historic reasons.  However, there are a good number of brands that have all increased their watch case sizes to follow the larger watch trend.  This is true of even some of the top brands such as Patek, AP, and VC.  Years ago Calatravas were around 32-34mm.  Now the smallest I believe is around 35 and they make some that are 38 mm.  This is not a new trend, its been going on for 10+ years.  In the end, its important to find what you like, what works with your needs and your sense of style.  Its the same as buying a suit, not every cut or maker is right for every person.  Some are a better fit for some people both physically and in terms of their sense of style.  Find the right one for you and regardless of how the watch size trend goes, you will have a watch that you will enjoy for a very long time.

Good luck with your journey to choosing the right watch. 

+1 on all of the above

A good example of watches that may seem trendy but are based in history in my view, is the IWC Portuguese. If you look at the history of the watch it was originally produced in 1939 using a pocket watch mvmt and was 43mm or so in size, HUGE in those days. The current models are in may ways faithful to this, in size and aesthetic.

I happen to think the perpetual calendar models are absolutely stunning, although the one posted earlier in this thread (rose gold/black dial, looks like a ref 5032 ) is my least favorite combination. Way nicer are the ref 5023 in rose gold with white dial or in white gold with dark grey dial. There is another ref 5032 in white gold with a beautiful blue dial but I don't care for the overall dial design. Much too cluttered IMO

[Full disclosure: I own a couple]
post #28328 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbonbasted View Post

All-in-all I went from being sure that the XVII was the watch for me to ruling it out altogether. I plan on taking a closer look at the XV and XVI moving forward. Just figured I'd share if anyone else was entertaining the idea...

I'm so glad you came to this conclusion that I just took a (rather crappy) pic:

post #28329 of 48312
Haha, Kap I was wondering when you were gonna say, "Told ya so!" Should have trusted the pro from day one.
post #28330 of 48312
cheers.gif

Btw, totally not a pro, I just have the taste of a stodgy, grumpy old man laugh.gif
post #28331 of 48312
Kap, that Seamaster looks v noice nod[1].gif

I may go back to the DJ and compare...


I had a blue day today.


AppleMark
post #28332 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaplan View Post

Going vintage, something like this would certainly fit the bill:

omegasixties.jpg

(Found that pic in the 4 year old thread where I last asked around for this kind of watch.)
Does anyone know what reference this is?? I want.
post #28333 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaplan View Post

I'm so glad you came to this conclusion that I just took a (rather crappy) pic:



Not crappy!

Quoted just for the next page re-post!
post #28334 of 48312
Quick throw on the wrist (need to get the dealer to remove some links still)

post #28335 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by akatsuki View Post

Quick throw on the wrist (need to get the dealer to remove some links still)

Congrats!!! Enjoy it!
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...)