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 2224  

post #33346 of 48312
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

They also invented tennis, golf and sailing.

OK, that might have been Tampax.  Or were they skydiving?

Anyway, something.

post #33347 of 48312
i have said this before, but ill say it again, for me, the best part about rolex is, that you just cant argue with a rolex.

best movement? nope.

best design? nope.

most complicated? nope.

highest level of finishing? nope.

and all the same, it is pretty much the perfect watch.

rolex is king.

haters gone hate.
post #33348 of 48312

Eh, where I come from, a "rollucks" (rhymes with bollocks) is a lawnmower. But they did invent the Ninja Blade Cutting System.



PS: Moving to London tomorrow. Wish me luck. Forecast for the Summer months shows a 100% chance of severe watch and shoe kopping.

post #33349 of 48312
Originally Posted by Tsujigiri View Post


Someone feel free to point out examples if I'm wrong, but I don't think Rolex is much of an innovator. Almost all of their watches use the same basic design and are based off the same movement, which doesn't have that much that stands out about it. 

Why don't you actually do some of your own research rather than making some blanket statement with little to support what you have said.  As for most of their watches using the same basic movement, so f*cking what?  Do you know anything about other brands?  Why don't you do some research and see how many Pateks use cal 215 or 240 or some variation of it.  Perhaps you should consider how many APs use call 3120  or how many will be powered by it in the future.  Companies often use the same movements in different watches, or they modify them and put them in other watches.  If the so called "Elite brands" do that and its acceptable, why in the world should Rolex reinvent the wheel and put different movements in every watch.  No company does that.  


Or how about something more complicated like a chronograph.  Rolex developed and uses its own in house movement for cal 4130, and chronographs are one of the most difficult movements to design, and the R&D that goes into them is substantial.  Cal 4130 is considered one of the best movements and unlike most it has an exceptionally long power reserve of 72 hours.  Why don't you do some research and you will see that until recently, most IWC, and many Breitling, Omegas, and countless other brands based their movements on outsourced calibers from ETA or used Valjoux 7750 (or a spin off from it for chronographs).  ETA/Valjouxs are solid workhorse movements, but they were common and relatively inexpensive.  So if you bought some watches from those other brands you basically got a similar movement that could be found in a competitor or at times in substantially less expensive watches.  So some of those other well known prestigious watches at times could be considered a common movement differing just by the cases holding them.  Care to do some research on how many high end brands use a F.Piguet about several VCs, APs, Breguets, Blancpains, and Cartiers.


Also ever looked closely at AP, most of their watches are based on a forty 42 year old design, the Royal Oak.  Its what they are known best for, and there are numerous spin offs from it from perpetual calendars and chronographs, to larger sportier watches such as the Offshore line.  Or consider Pateks competitor, the Nautilus, another luxury sports watch that is nearly 40 years old, and has numerous spin offs and variations.  Sure Patek makes very complicated watches, but the models most frequently seen in public are the Calatrava (a nearly 80 year old line of dress watches) and the Nautilus.  Part of what makes these watches so appealing and retain value is that they don't look dated.  You can see an evolution in the various models, but they don't look dated the way a bunch of VC's sports watches such as the 222 (which I like) the 333 (I hate), the Phideas, and the Overseas or several Omega Seamasters of the past do.  You can look at VC's sports watches of the 70s, 80s, and 90s and see they were searching for a solid design to stick with but couldn't. So their lineage of sports watches is all over the place, have little in common, and you can tell the decade just by looking at them.  Omega's Seamasters also were all over the place with completely different looks from the 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's.  It has taken them some time to find a design that is solid and that they are sticking with.  Often times when watches look dated, it can reduce the value of a watch, because not everyone wants something that screams 1974.  While watches that evolve are seen as "Timeless" (no pun intended) classics.  


Your statements make you seem like a Newbie hater.  Its ok if Rolex isn't your thing, but at least do your homework before you take a swipe at them.  Oh, and in case you think I'm just a Rolex Fan Boy, I also own watches from some of the brands that I mentioned above.


Originally Posted by Tsujigiri View Post

I'll admit that there are more innovations there than I had thought, but I believe that list has been highly embellished by marketing. Waterproof watches were made long before Rolex even existed, for instance; Rolex just made a more popular and iconic model. And many of the innovations listed there aren't actually innovations at all. The chronometer certification, for an example, is just a set of tests that many watches can pass, but it ultimately became a certification the Swiss used to exclude foreign products that were built just as well as their own. Also many of the things on those list are minor improvements to meet a Rolex-defined benchmark, which don't really display ingenuity the way a real innovation would.


Granted, Rolex does make a good product. I don't think anyone doubts that. But I don't think the few design elements and improvements they have incorporated show very much creativity or out of the box thinking. Of course this is not necessary to make a good product, and creativity for creativity's sake is often not worthwhile. But if we're talking about innovation, Rolex's accomplishments pale in comparison to many other watchmakers. Devising something like coaxial escapement (before anyone says it, I do realize that Omega wasn't the one to come up with this. I'm not bringing up another Omega vs. Rolex debate) takes much more refined thinking than "hey, why don't we use a more stainless stainless steel?"

Does a company need to reinvent the wheel for you?  What is creative.  Breguet invented the tourbillon for a pocket watch in 1801, AP was the first to figure out how to use it in a wrist watch in the 1980s.  Was the unoriginal of AP?  Why didn't Breguet get it into a wrist watch first.  What about all the others that make them today in wrist watches, are they all just copy cats?  Then one has to ask, what's the point of even putting it in a wrist watch, since a wrist watch isn't stationary, the issues about gravitational effects making it less accurate are less of an issue than they would have been for pocket watches that sat in a vest pocket all day.  So whats the point in being innovative when its not functional, its more or less art today.  Considering how few people will own one, compared to the number that will own a Submariner or Datejust isn't it sort of a useless invention, while a Submariner which is less artful and less rare, can be used for many of the most rigorous activities without skipping a beat and therefore as a rugged sports watch is a more useful invention.  Is the Breguet Tourbillon in a pocket watch vs. an AP Tourbillon in a wrist watch not unlike early water proof pocket watches v Rolex being one of the first waterproof wrist watches.  I think it should be noted that while some pocket watches and wrist watches were available from other companies, Rolex was one of the first to offer it on large scale to the masses on most of their watches.  So perhaps that has some value.


Furthermore, since you bring up Omega, which makes some great creative is it to release their watches on bracelets that look like Rolex Oyster bracelets with polished center links, or their Speedmaster that essentially looks like a Paul Newman Daytona from the 1960s.  


Beyond that consider Rolex's GMT Master.  It was released in 1954 and is essentially the granddaddy of GMT watches.  Most GMT watches we see today have borrowed elements of their design.  If you are going to knock one brand for not being creative, take a more in depth look at other brands.  



Originally Posted by Tsujigiri View Post

This is true, because Rolex makes a good product. But I think a lot of times we make deities of things we like and convince ourselves that they are the one true creation, and everything else must be a shallow imitation. Rolex has made a couple innnovations, but really not that many and not that groundbreaking. And this in no way detracts from its quality as a watch, nor should it detract from its owners enjoyment.

VC was the first brand to make a machines and dies to produce uniform parts so that watches could be more easily repaired due to the uniformity of parts, be it in the movements, or the cases, dials etc.  But today everyone does that.  There are many things that brands did that were innovative back in the day, which have made it into other watches.  Companies borrow ideas and improve upon them.  Its stupid to reinvent the wheel for everything when someone has a good basis to use as a platform.  Creating things that are different is actually quite easy.  Creating something that is an actual improvement is difficult.  I think that Rolex and most every good brand have histories that are rich with ideas and innovations, but they also borrow heavily from successful designs be it their own or others.  Anything less would be a waste of resources and result in most fine watches being even more insanely expensive than they already are.  


You can go on website and get catalogs from Rolex, Cartier, Omega, GP, Brietling, PP, AP, VC, JLC, etc and they will all list their achievements and innovations.  Whether they are drastic or small is something that many of us may disagree on, but I really don't think any of the above-mentioned brands are particularly weaker or stronger in terms of achievements.  Their focuses are often different, their clients are different, and their philosophies are different and each should be appreciated for what they bring to the public.  I think if you truly did research on this issue, you would find Rolex was more innovative than you are willing to give them credit for and other brands can be creative but borrow heavily and may not be as innovative as you think.

Edited by Dino944 - 7/4/14 at 3:39am
post #33350 of 48312
people who are crushing it today: dino.
post #33351 of 48312
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

Waterproof Wristwatch wis RUSSIAN Inwention! Only WOSTOK Watch Conquer Ze Weepest Depths won Wrist off Wrighteous Sowiet Sailors in Mighty Sowiet Submarine!

:rotflmao: Thanks Mr. Chekov. Are you still looking for the nuclear Wessels in Alameda


 Actually their subs (including their nuclear ones) weren't that mighty.  Its sad and frightening to consider how many of them are at the bottom of the ocean.  I highly recommend reading K19 the Widow Maker.  The movie with Harrison Ford sucked, but the book is a great read and it really goes on with numerous examples of how we thought we were in a race with them during the "Cold War, " but in reality the were so far behind us they may as well have been living in the dark ages.    

post #33352 of 48312
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

people who are crushing it today: dino.

Mah mannn :fistbump:

post #33353 of 48312
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

...not everyone wants something that screams 1974...
1974 was a very good year to be born. But you're right, not everyone appreciates the best of things.
post #33354 of 48312
This classic post from DMB seems apt right about now:
Unfortunately, there are times when "common folks" get lucky and somehow acquire a Rolex. Usually by selling family heirlooms, organs, or a kid. Anyhow, in an effort to keep those "washed in the blood" separate from the rubes "with a Rollie", Hans Wilsdorf came up with a secret handshake that would immediately identify "The Chosen Ones" — or "Annointed Ones", if you will — and allow salespersons to distinguish them from the peons.

Once the handshake is properly administered, access to the secret Rolex Room is granted. There, hidden in underground catacombs, is a labrynth of treasures, treats, and free swag ... all readily available to "true" Rolex owners. Paul Newman Daytonas, McQueen Explorers, vintage no crown guard Submariners, all polished up and recently serviced, ready to be molested and freely worn in a private lounge with rich mahogany and leather-bound furniture. Tall, attractive Swiss women with short skirts serve caviar, champagne and other food and spirits while one can relax and enjoy intelligent horological banter with experienced veteran watchmakers and collectors. Before leaving, the "guests" are showered with the finest swag to include Rolex embossed leather wallets, gold pen sets, golf shirts and caps, and other trinkets. Then, a spectacular green-and-gold-painted golf cart ushers them from a hidden exit to their vehicle in the parking lot.

But only those worthy are shown the secret handshake, and .... OH WAIT. Umm .... nevermind.


Man, I miss that guy's writing.
post #33355 of 48312
Someone sure got on the wrong side of Dino today, that is some excellent noob bashing, thoroughly enjoyed the
post #33356 of 48312
Things change, and they may even someday be let in on the look and the secret handshake. More DMB:
What a coincidence; I also just returned from the Mall, where I purchased a bottle of the latest hot "scent" for The Skirt, to put in her Xmas stocking. It's called Sultry Wench, and it contains pheromones harvested from the sweat of actual Vegas call girls. It's quite pungent, and arousing. But I digress. While there, I wandered into the Lee Michael store, which is a dealer of Rolex as well as some of the more pedestrian brands like Omega, Tag, and a few other "battery powered" assaults on horology, which are coveted by the common folk.

As I walked in, I noticed a well-dressed salesperson showing what appeared to be a very expensive engagement/wedding ring set to a young, wealthy-looking couple. He immediately noticed my Rolex GMT II, as I simultaneously observed approx 2/3 of the bezel and dial of a platinum Yachtmaster peeking out from underneath his cuff. He instantly recognized that I was a heavy hitter, and a person of impeccable taste and class. We exchanged "the look" that only a Rolex owner knows and appreciates. As I casually strolled to the Rolex display case, I saw him out of the corner of my eye quickly "shooing" the young couple away as he hastily made his way over to me, body-checking an elderly saleswoman wearing some form of quartz atrocity, who had already set her sights on me.

He introduced himself, and we exchanged the secret Rolex handshake that only those washed in the blood are privy to. I stated that I was only there to "spin a few bezels" as I was a bit pressed for time. "Nonsense" he replied. "It is my pleasure to be of service to you". "Would you like a cappuccino, or perhaps an iced coffee?"

I advised him that I wanted to molest the Rolex Explorer that was in the case, as well as an older model Sea-Dweller if they happened to have one. He apologized profusely and confessed that his failings as a salesman had caused them to be currently out of stock of the older Sea-Dweller, but stated that they did have the new Deep Sea in the safe. He explained that it was reserved for only the most important of customers, and was not shown to "the commoners". He quickly went in back and retrieved it for my inspection.

While perhaps the most over-engineered dive watch that has ever been manufactured by man, it is a bit ridiculous to say the least. The quality is first-rate, but the sheer height and weight of this behemoth is overly daunting. I cannot see where this would be a watch that would be in any way comfortable to wear. I was impressed with the Rolex quality, but sadly informed him that this watch would never grace the wrist of DMB. I then tried on the Explorer and was instantly in love with the smaller size, clean lines, and overall presence of such a diminutive piece. I advised him that it was definitely a contender for a slot in my leather-bound rich mahogany watch box. I concluded my watch orgy with a fondling of a grey dial Turnograph, no-date Submariner, green Submariner LV, new two-tone ceramic blue Submariner, white Explorer II, new large Datejust, and — last but not least — a hearty laugh at the ridiculous crack-induced yellow gold Yachtmaster II. All in all, it was a pleasant morning, and I believe an additional Rolex is on the horizon.
post #33357 of 48312
Originally Posted by wurger View Post

Someone sure got on the wrong side of Dino today, that is some excellent noob bashing, thoroughly enjoyed the

happy.gif Great write-up Dino!

Happy July 4th my US neighbors!

Wearing some blue, white and red colors to celebrate with you!

post #33358 of 48312
Looks like I have quite a few pages of catching up to do!

Nice wrist shot, Steel.
post #33359 of 48312
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post

Looks like I have quite a few pages of catching up to do!

Nice wrist shot, Steel.

Thanks Keith!
post #33360 of 48312
Anytime I see Rolex hate, its smacks of jealousy and petty resentment.
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...)