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 2001  

post #30001 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTukker View Post


I like what you did here and the criteria you used, but how is the chrono on the speedy useful in every day life? Don't get me wrong, I like wearing my chrono, but unless I wear it to the gym (which I don't; I am no Frills), it doesn't get used much..

It may depend on one's line of work.  If you have to keep track of billable hours, it could come in handy.  That's what I have used mine for in the past.  However, some of my friends create the need to use it, say time how long a frozen pizza is in the toaster oven, or time how long they have been sitting in traffic, or maybe the most useful thing is timing how long you have until a parking meter runs out.  However, in general, most of my friends that have chronographs never use them.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by robw View Post

dn't be so quick to make assumptions about people based on their watch. people like us who study, talk about and  are obsessed about watches are a very small minority of the watch population. I don't think too many watch companies would stay in business if we were the entire customer base.  Most high end watches are bought by people who just like the way they look and/or want a status symbol. I know some people who have some very serious watches and know very little about them just that they are expensive status symbols.

It is very possible that this guy walked into a shop and decided to pick up the Hublot because it caught his eye or because the salesman might have told him that is what's popular now or any other reason. If it had been a different time or different watch shop, he might have walked out with a Royal Oak or a Nautilus bought for the same reason(s) and you wouldn't be thinking douche. 

In general I agree with your post.  However, there are stereotypes for lots of brands (be it clothing, watches, cars etc). Sometimes, it can be difficult to understand why someone would buy a brand we dislike or view as overpriced.  Personally, for the price of some of the limited edition Hublot's I often wonder why someone doesn't purchase a different brand...but to each his own.   In the end, there are owners who behave in a manner that dispel stereotypes and there are those that behave in a manner that perpetuate the stereotype.  I'd like to think, we are all able to give someone an opportunity to show us the type of person they are regardless of their purchase choices. 

post #30002 of 48312
Quote:
I like what you did here and the criteria you used, but how is the chrono on the speedy useful in every day life? Don't get me wrong, I like wearing my chrono, but unless I wear it to the gym (which I don't; I am no Frills), it doesn't get used much..

Agreed, although you could also probably say that about most watch functions and I always thought of the chrono as one of the most important achievments in watchmaking. Let's face it, they're cool especially the flyback. As far as useability is concerned, I think dual time should also be in most people's collections.
Quote:
+1. I once complimented a guy on his watch.
I said "hey, nice DateJust". He replied "Oh no...It's a Rolex".

hahaha.

I was talking to a datejust owner (didn't know him well) and he had asked me what he thought I could get if he sold his 30yr old datejust. I said, I'm not sure but I would guess around $2000 to $2500. He looked at me completely stunned and upset. He thought it would be worth three times that.
post #30003 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

In the end, there are owners who behave in a manner that dispel stereotypes and there are those that behave in a manner that perpetuate the stereotype.

right. for example, im a doosher and a tool. but a classy one at that. hence the rollie and the JLC.
post #30004 of 48312
Speaking of Rolex, I have been looking at the Polar Explorer but haven't been able to find the older model with the 3186/3185 to try on. Any opinions about preference between the new and old? Not so much on the movement but on the size, dial and bracelet changes.
post #30005 of 48312

Rooster,

 

I have the 40mm 16570 (with a black dial), from 2001.  I like the size and the case.  The bracelet and clasp are not a finely made, as the current bracelet and clasp.  However, I've used it for more than a decade and it has held up beautifully.  There isn't the stretch you frequently see on older hollow link Jubilee bracelets, even though the center links of the old model are hollow.  I would suggest that if you were considering the previous model, that you get one from 2001 or newer (which I think is a P serial number prefix), so that you get the bracelet that has solid end links (SEL) that attach to the watch case, it just looks more integrated (than the old "Clam shell" attachments.  

 

Today, particularly at the prices Rolex charges for their watches, we have come to expect and demand solid bracelet links and machined clasps particularly when they MSRP starts at over $8,000 for many sports model. However, the old ones are more than up to any punishment you can dish out.  Years ago in the 1970s and 1980s professional divers still relied on and wore Subs and Sea-Dwellers which were on hollow link bracelets and those held up quite well considering the punishment they put up with.  Later hollow link bracelets from the 1990s were better made.  In addition, if budget is an issue, the 16570s sell for about 45-50% less than a current Ex2. I own Rolex watches with new and old styles of bracelet and clasp and it doesn't matter very much to me. Its more the watch itself and condition that would matter to me. 

 

I have tried the new Explorer 2 on and I like it quite a bit because its one of the only sports models that has lugs that taper and the case still looks a bit like the classic Oyster case rather than having sort of squared off lugs.  However, as for its size...I have kind of mixed feelings about it.  On some level I think that some of the new larger Rolex watches should have been supplied on slightly wider bracelets, as I find the wide cases make the bracelets look like they are too narrow and were merely taken off of older narrower Rolex watches cases and aren't quite as proportionately ideal for the new cases.  I sort of have mixed feelings about the orange hand also.  Sure its sort of a cool throwback to the vintage orange hand models that are collectible and highly sought after...however on the other hand there is a bit of "Cashing in" on this vintage look now that the originals are quite valuable that maybe bothers me slightly.  Its still a great watch, and I like it, I just have some mixed feelings about it.  Good luck with whatever you decide. 

post #30006 of 48312
adyhybun.jpg

One of my favourites. Due to size and heft, not easy to wear with French cuff but still wear frequently with formal attire..
post #30007 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cant kill da Rooster View Post

Speaking of Rolex, I have been looking at the Polar Explorer but haven't been able to find the older model with the 3186/3185 to try on. Any opinions about preference between the new and old? Not so much on the movement but on the size, dial and bracelet changes.

The new bracelet is the bees knees and I'm a huge fan of it, but there is plenty of info on it out on the web. As for everything else, I prefer the 16570 to the 216570, but I suppose it depends on the person. I really dislike the look of the 216570 in every way, so my opinion is pretty biased. But in general, I find the 16570 to be cleaner looking, better proportioned, and it sits on my wrist a lot better. I will say the 16570 may be slightly less legible at a glance, so that's a plus for the 216570. Maybe this picture will be helpful (not mine).

post #30008 of 48312
Thanks Dino, that is helfpful. I was looking at M or newer and I have read different points of view on the bracelet. It's not a component I am hung up on. After talking with a local watchmaker, it was his opinion that the later models with the 3186 movement would be more collectible. I realize of course that is only his opinion as he also liked the previous version better for other reasons including the size....and then there is the price difference.

I tried on the new model a couple of weeks ago and was surprised I liked it. Like you, I thought the orange GMT hand would be too loud and the 42mm would be too large. I will eventually track the other one down to try on.
Quote:
Maybe this picture will be helpful (not mine).

The 40mm looks more subtle. Legibility was a minor concern but I'm leaning toward the 16570.
post #30009 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cant kill da Rooster View Post

Thanks Dino, that is helfpful. I was looking at M or newer and I have read different points of view on the bracelet. It's not a component I am hung up on. After talking with a local watchmaker, it was his opinion that the later models with the 3186 movement would be more collectible. I realize of course that is only his opinion as he also liked the previous version better for other reasons including the size....and then there is the price difference.

I tried on the new model a couple of weeks ago and was surprised I liked it. Like you, I thought the orange GMT hand would be too loud and the 42mm would be too large. I will eventually track the other one down to try on.
The 40mm looks more subtle. Legibility was a minor concern but I'm leaning toward the 16570.

Hey Rooster,

 

You are very welcome.  Both are great watches.  It's merely a matter of what you prefer.  I am not really convinced having the 3186 will make the later ones more collectible. Rolex has made such large quantities of watches each year, that there is no shortage or rarity of watches with either movement.  The truly collectible Explorer 2 is the original model, as it wasn't very popular, people beat the heck out of them when they were new, and production and the number of nice originals is quite low compared to its modern namesake. 

 

Its best to try them on and see which really appeals to you.  Either one is built to last you many decades.  Good luck with whatever you decide.

post #30010 of 48312
I plead the Swatch association. peepwall[1].gif But seriously, the 1863 is a fantastic movement any way you slice it, it wasn't a big deal ultimately to borrow from (now) Breguet.

But I ultimately got swayed by finding a watch that hit on most of my criteria, then trying it on and quickly becoming unable to go on without it. Also, I felt the heritage and aesthetics was strong enough so as to not mind the movement being developed in a shop without the Omega stamp on it.
post #30011 of 48312
Sorry Guys. Basically like Dino said...No modern Rolex will be collectible. Buy it because you like it.
post #30012 of 48312
Understood. Really appreciate your thoughts guys.
post #30013 of 48312
I think the recent platinum Daytona with brown dial may become one. Otherwise agree.

Not that I plan to put my money where my mouth is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post

Sorry Guys. Basically like Dino said...No modern Rolex will be collectible. Buy it because you like it.
post #30014 of 48312

I have just discovered that a watch boutique near my new office has recently become the AD for both VC and IWC.  I've never seen either of these two makers locally.  It just so happens that I have been ogling some VCs lately, thanks to recent TWAT discussion.  So this evening after work I went for a look, and was delighted to find both a nice selection of things I'd actually want, and an informed and enthusiastic salesman.

 

I must apologise in advance for not taking pics of the more exotic offerings: I did actually play with the Malte Tourbillon and it's gorgeous, but by that time my battery was dead, and anyway, I was only really looking at things that are contenders for a major (for me) purchase some time down the line.  Apart from not wearing gold, I can't see myself having tourbillon money any time soon, or wanting to spend it if I did.  So I stuck to aspirational steel...

 

First up, the Patrimony.  They had both the Traditionelle and the Contemporaine.  With one look I decided I preferred the slender hands and balanced minimalism of the more modern look, and gave it a try:

 

 

It's a beautiful, simple piece, just nothing wrong with it.  The strap is nice too; all of the VCs were actually: really soft, supple, high-quality gator belly with perfect pattern.  It's the little details, eh?  It's a pretty big dial which isn't for everyone, and looks huge next to my old Omega.  But it's light and easy on the wrist, because it's a real pancake:

 

 

 

The VCs I've been wondering about for a while are in the Overseas range.  One of the most distinctive and appealing is the Dual Time.  This one comes on a rubber strap, but with a sweet dark grey gator to switch with.  It's a really pleasant thing to wear, and has plenty of interest with the titanium/steel combo and the proportions of the subdials:

 

 

 

The chronograph falls neatly between the  Daytona and Royal Oak in price, and I think somewhat in style.  It's on the larger side - as big as my Monster and heavy with it, like the latest ROC, but less striking in design from a distance.  You have to get closer to notice what it is, and I rather like that.  Lucky for me they had the blue one in stock, which is the one that catches my eye in the pictures.  The brushed finishes on the cases are great, and I love the way the Maltese cross motif is built into the links on the bracelet.  And man, it moved me.

 

 

I've always loved the Daytona, and I've come to love the RO a great deal after my TWAT education and seeing many in person.  But I think this less obvious almost-sports-chrono has something rather eclectic and subtle about it.  Today at least, it's my favourite of the three, and that I really didn't expect.

 

Now, apropos of not much, here are two Portuguese chronos:

 

 

They wear big because of the narrow bezel and straight case profile, and the lip around the edge of the bezel catches on your shirt sleeve to ensure they stay visible, which makes them feel just a bit awkward to me with a proper shirt.  But they are lovely nonetheless.  I just still can't work out which is prettiest: blue or gold numbers?

 

Let me know.  I'm going to bed, g'night.

post #30015 of 48312

Mimo, would you mind expanding a bit on the VC Overseas bracelet if you get a chance. How it felt, comfort, etc.

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...)