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 2177  

post #32641 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliq View Post
 

really loving the Cartier Tanks so far. i've been looking for a classic automatic one for some time, they're far and few where I am ):

Generally the "Classic Tank" is the Louis Cartier Tank.   In the original size they are manual winds or quartz.  The Tank XLs are manual winds.  If you are looking for an automatic Tank you will probably need to consider the Tank Solo XL, a Tank Francaise or a Tank Americaine.  To be honest, many people prefer the older manual wind Tank Americaines over the automatics. as they generally have much finer finished, less common movements, and they look dressier as they do not have a date window which spoils the symmetry of the dial.  Good luck with your search. 

post #32642 of 48312

The Tank MC is also pretty new with the same movement used in the Calibre, if I'm not mistaken.

post #32643 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by d4nimal View Post

The Tank MC is also pretty new with the same movement used in the Calibre, if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, another option but fairly chunky and again not anything close to a classic Tank.
post #32644 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post
 

Generally the "Classic Tank" is the Louis Cartier Tank.   In the original size they are manual winds or quartz.  The Tank XLs are manual winds.  If you are looking for an automatic Tank you will probably need to consider the Tank Solo XL, a Tank Francaise or a Tank Americaine.  To be honest, many people prefer the older manual wind Tank Americaines over the automatics. as they generally have much finer finished, less common movements, and they look dressier as they do not have a date window which spoils the symmetry of the dial.  Good luck with your search. 

 

Great information Dino!   I did not know some of the nuances of the Tank collection that you have mentioned.

post #32645 of 48312

Anyone have experience with the Pelagos? Titanium makes the best tool/all round watch. I love the hardened titanium on my Seiko shogun, but the adjustable nature of the Pelagos clasp would be handy in these SoCal summers.

 

 

Also, my vintage Longines (best vintage watch for the money right now, IMO) with the 12.68z movement:

 

 

post #32646 of 48312

That Longines is sweet.

 

I looked at the Pelagos recently (about twenty pages back, probably), and it's great - beautifully proportioned despite its solid, sporty size.  The thing is, it's pretty expensive now for what was always the "cheap" substitute for a Rolex sports watch.  And trying a Sub at the same time, despite the in some ways more elegant ratios of the Pelagos, it just felt so much cheaper.  That's partly the lightness of the titanium of course, but it's a serious thought: it's almost $5000 new, and when a Submariner is $7k, you have to think "save a little longer and get the Sub".  

 

The design of the Pelagos just isn't distinctive enough from a dozen other ETA-based divers for less money, many of which have less of an air of being a Submariner substitute.  It's not that the Pelagos is a bad watch, but it's neither cheap enough to be a bargain alternative to the Submariner, or different enough to be considered on its own merits alone.  

 

Get a titanium Planet Ocean if you want to be different, or get a classic immaculate used Sub for the same money if the aesthetic of the new one doesn't work for you.  Or if you want to get a cheaper ETA-based diver, your favourite Longines makes but one of a hundred at half the price or less.

post #32647 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

That Longines is sweet.

 

I looked at the Pelagos recently (about twenty pages back, probably), and it's great - beautifully proportioned despite its solid, sporty size.  The thing is, it's pretty expensive now for what was always the "cheap" substitute for a Rolex sports watch.  And trying a Sub at the same time, despite the in some ways more elegant ratios of the Pelagos, it just felt so much cheaper.  That's partly the lightness of the titanium of course, but it's a serious thought: it's almost $5000 new, and when a Submariner is $7k, you have to think "save a little longer and get the Sub".  

 

The design of the Pelagos just isn't distinctive enough from a dozen other ETA-based divers for less money, many of which have less of an air of being a Submariner substitute.  It's not that the Pelagos is a bad watch, but it's neither cheap enough to be a bargain alternative to the Submariner, or different enough to be considered on its own merits alone.  

 

Get a titanium Planet Ocean if you want to be different, or get a classic immaculate used Sub for the same money if the aesthetic of the new one doesn't work for you.  Or if you want to get a cheaper ETA-based diver, your favourite Longines makes but one of a hundred at half the price or less.

 

Many thanks for the compliments on the Longines. It took me forever to find a good vintage watch above 36mm (Ive realized for my wrists, anything under 38mm is stretching credulity)

 

This touches on the debate that I have seen surrounding the Pelagos. While I agree it is retail priced aggressively (though tourneau quoted me $4100, not sure where you saw $5k) and employs a pedestrian movement (this fact alone is enough to encourage grey and used market sales. This is a cheap movement that is easy to service by a third party, and the watch can be had 3k used, which is a decent price) people are not looking at this watch in the right terms. From a functional tool perspective, this watch is superior to the Submariner. It is lighter, stronger, and goes deeper (though nowadays, a fact largely irrelevant). The lower thermal conductivity of titanium prevents it from getting that slick, sweaty feel that steel acquires in humid climes.

 

The problem with the Submariner nowadays is that it was never meant to be a luxury watch. It was supposed to be a high quality, robust working tool that a working person could afford and rely on. Not cheap, but not luxury. Put simply, there is absolutely nothing in the modern submariner that makes it worth 7000 dollars. Neither the engineering nor the materials nor the COSC certification (easily acheived by watches orders of magnitude cheaper and home tinkerers everywhere). By that reasoning, I might as well go for a Daytona at 11k, since at least that offers a chronograph. The Submariner is by all means a quality piece, but you can achieve the same quality or better from any number of other brands making steel divers. What you are paying for with Rolex is the aggressive marketing, the purposeful display of conspicuous consumption, and essentially downpaying for increased resale prices down the road.

 

The titanium planet ocean does not have an adjusting bracelet, which is my primary draw to the Pelagos. My Seiko SBDC007 (Shogun) is better than the titanium PO at less than 1/3 of the price.

 

I will stand by my statement that titanium is superior to steel. People who argue about "heft" are missing the point -- anyone can build a thick and/or heavy watch. To create something that is thinner, more streamlined, and from a superior material is what takes skill. "Heft" is a scam and is about pulling wool over people's eyes. If you have ever dived with a steel diver on a steel bracelet, it gets annoying. It becomes anchor/ballast tied to your wrist. A titanium watch disappears by comparison.

 

I strongly encourage you to handle one of Seiko's Brightz/Diashield hardened titanium watches. The look is indistinguishable from steel and the mirror finish is diamond hard. You will never see swirls or hairlines in it. It is in every way the most superlative material for a functionality oriented timepiece. I wish Tudor had used a similar material but my goal in this enterprise is to find a clean, robust daily wear watch that will transition into any activity or scenario I want. To me, that is how you bond with a watch. 


Edited by DerangedGoose - 6/14/14 at 1:01pm
post #32648 of 48312

I like the Pelagos, there's no question that it's a good watch, and if you love it, buy it.  I just think that even used or discounted, you are indeed paying for the Rolex "aggressive marketing, the purposeful display of conspicuous consumption, and essentially downpaying for increased resale prices down the road".  Except that you're getting neither the Rolex brand nor the resale.

 

Your Seiko sounds like better value.  And I do love my Monster. :)

post #32649 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

I like the Pelagos, there's no question that it's a good watch, and if you love it, buy it.  I just think that even used or discounted, you are indeed paying for the Rolex "aggressive marketing, the purposeful display of conspicuous consumption, and essentially downpaying for increased resale prices down the road".  Except that you're getting neither the Rolex brand nor the resale.

 

Your Seiko sounds like better value.  And I do love my Monster. :)

 

If you think about it in terms of margins, you are getting more with the Pelagos. Both the Rolex and ETA movements are machine assembled at this point, but Titanium is difficult to machine. Bought secondhand at the $3000 mark (which is how I intend to acquire it), with the lack of titanium divers in the marketplace, I dont see the Tudor Pelagos ever really losing that much value.

 

To be honest, if the Seiko had the Pelagos clasp, I would not even both with it. It would be the end-all be-all of titanium divers. The hardened titanium finishing is top notch, and the interplay between brushed and polished surfaces brilliantly executed. Running well within COSC specs out of the box:

 

 

post #32650 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post

Great information Dino!   I did not know some of the nuances of the Tank collection that you have mentioned.

Thanks JB, I'm glad you found it interesting. Cartier is often dismissed as a jewelry maker, and garners less respect than big names, by those who are not very familiar with their watches. However, they have a very rich history in the world of watch and have made many exceptional pieces over the years. The Tank collection alone has an amazing history and numerous variations such as the Tank Obus, Tank Cintree (a favorite of the "King of cool"Steve McQueen), Tank Chinoise, and Tank Asymetric just to name a few (which are highly collectible). They make some great products, but my favorites are their pieces from the past.
post #32651 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DerangedGoose View Post

[...]The problem with the Submariner nowadays is that it was never meant to be a luxury watch. It was supposed to be a high quality, robust working tool that a working person could afford and rely on. Not cheap, but not luxury. Put simply, there is absolutely nothing in the modern submariner that makes it worth 7000 dollars. Neither the engineering nor the materials nor the COSC certification (easily acheived by watches orders of magnitude cheaper and home tinkerers everywhere). By that reasoning, I might as well go for a Daytona at 11k, since at least that offers a chronograph. The Submariner is by all means a quality piece, but you can achieve the same quality or better from any number of other brands making steel divers. What you are paying for with Rolex is the aggressive marketing, the purposeful display of conspicuous consumption, and essentially downpaying for increased resale prices down the road.[...]
There's no question that the marketing has been successful. The thing is that its price reflects the cost of producing things to that quality standard in Switzerland these days. Consider Nomos; a Zurich model it's proportional to what an OP or a Datejust costs; if it came on a bracelet they'd cost about the same. Nomos is an absolutely great company, and you can hardly accuse them of being a conspicuous-consumption label or a marketing big spender. Not cheap either, but worth the money. The quality is definitely there in both cases (no pun intended).

They're one of the few companies that's comparable to Rolex in degree of independence and design/manufacturing integrity , though. If you don't outsource your component production to cheap-labour countries, a quality watch is going to be expensive to make. While it's certainly not cheap, I happen to think that the Submariner offers a lot of value for the money, all things considered. And that's not even considering the lack of design originality from most competitors. It's a truly no-excuses watch, which is not a common thing in the industry.
post #32652 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post


There's no question that the marketing has been successful. The thing is that its price reflects the cost of producing things to that quality standard in Switzerland these days. Consider Nomos; a Zurich model it's proportional to what an OP or a Datejust costs; if it came on a bracelet they'd cost about the same. Nomos is an absolutely great company, and you can hardly accuse them of being a conspicuous-consumption label or a marketing big spender. Not cheap either, but worth the money. The quality is definitely there in both cases (no pun intended).

They're one of the few companies that's comparable to Rolex in degree of independence and design/manufacturing integrity , though. If you don't outsource your component production to cheap-labour countries, a quality watch is going to be expensive to make. While it's certainly not cheap, I happen to think that the Submariner offers a lot of value for the money, all things considered. And that's not even considering the lack of design originality from most competitors. It's a truly no-excuses watch, which is not a common thing in the industry.

 

The submariner is definitely a victim of its own success, but "no excuses" must also apply to its exorbitant price tag. It houses the same movement as a Datejust, what is there to justify so much extra? 

 

A casual search for a new mens datejust turns up a suggested msrp of $6800, I think a Nomos Zurich on a bracelet would be a fair amount less than that. What is impressive about Nomos is they are producing their own movements, at or above Rolex quality, with more handfinishing and way smaller economy of scale, and they are STILL undercutting Rolex on price. Rolex has been making the same stuff for decades, their margins are rock bottom at this point. You are getting way more for your money with Nomos. That and the datejust is overall a hideous watch. Various confused dials with arabic numerals in a sport font, the silly fluted bezel, the whole thing is just absurd looking, and the two tone look is even worse.

 

As a tool watch (its actual intended purpose) the Submariner really doesnt offer any value at all. I can buy a stronger, lighter watch for less money from their very own subsidiary, to say nothing of the myriad of other inhouse divers out there. Other big houses, even mainstream ones like Omega, are pushing innovation while Rolex rests on laurels earned decades ago. It may last them another 50 years but it wont be forever. 

 

As Rolex has pushed the Submariner ever market, it deserves ever more stringent scrutiny against upmarket standards, and it simply doesnt measure up.

post #32653 of 48312
Ok gentlemen, which do we prefer?



Or

post #32654 of 48312
Much of Rolex's innovation nowadays appears to be in materials and production over design. The Shogun is a wonderful watch for the money, but I couldn't get used to the hands and markers.
post #32655 of 48312
Even though Im not a fan of extra crowns for the gas escape valve (Rolex got it right in this regard), I would go with the Seamaster. I think the explorer gets a lot of hype and is rather boring looking. Some people call it "understated" but to me it just looks pedestrian. The ceramic blue seamasters are very sharp, especially with the twisted lugs Omega is known for. 
 
The Rolexes to get would be the GV Milgauss or the Everose Daytona, IMO
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...)