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 2308  

post #34606 of 48312
Thanks, most interesting, as always.
post #34607 of 48312
Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Dino.

Also, ceci n'est PAS UNE ROLEX:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

And I believe it's been a while (NSFW): Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

^ NOT FAKE!
post #34608 of 48312
Nice buy, TC! biggrin.gif
post #34609 of 48312


ventura sparc watch

post #34610 of 48312
Not a Rolex.
post #34611 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes Bourne View Post

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Dino.

Also, ceci n'est PAS UNE ROLEX: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

And I believe it's been a while (NSFW): Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

^ NOT FAKE!

You're welcome.  BTW nice photos!  

Quote:
Originally Posted by sl876 View Post
 


ventura sparc watch

I haven't seen one of those in years.  Hope you are enjoying it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zippyh View Post

Not a Rolex.

Great watch!  IMHO, one of the nicest and easiest to use multi-timezone watches.  

post #34612 of 48312
Another not a Rolex.
Repossessed from wife who had "borrowed" it quite some time ago.

post #34613 of 48312
Just to backtrack a bit re refinishing: general consensus is that watches shouldn't be refinished much, if at all, for resale value and natural patina/wear, etc (esp. sport watches). But I'm curious if much stainless steel has to me removed and is lost if it's only light refinishing, i.e. to remove superficial hairlines that can only be seen and not really felt.
post #34614 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes Bourne View Post



Weird how it looks huge in pics, whereas irl I can easily see 5mm of my wrist above and below the lugs.


Size looks really good IMO and that's a great Heuer.

Also quoting Wes for the inspired choice of a blue strap on this piece icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by ebayhtl View Post

Has anyone here gone through the Rolex v Tudor selection process?

I'm thinking of getting a Tudor Pelagos. I would probably prefer a Rolex Sub, all things considered, but I can't imagine ever getting to a stage where I'd be willing to pay double for the Rolex (given I like the Pelagos), given it'll be a second watch.

As others have recommended, it's probably best not to compromise on these things. I'm not sure the Sub is "worth" twice the monetary value of the Pelagos, but I suspect your personal enjoyment of owning and wearing the Sub might be doubled, if that makes any sense.

Not to throw logic or critical thinking out the window in this hobby obsession, but I have often been happier with the watch selections that I made more with my heart, rather than my head.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anderz View Post

Hi

I've been lurking in this thread for nearly a year but seeing the kind of watches on display here none of mine can really compare. But to bring some diversity to the Rolex/AP/PP I bring my Zenith Captain Central Seconds:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)




I'm really pleased with this as a modern version of my other watches which includes inherited 60's Omega Seamasters and Longines. 
Hope this is OK to post here and not in the poor mans watch thread smile.gif

Thanks!


Nice intro anderz! Love the Zenith.

Other lurkers (you know who you are): why not go ahead and enter the fray? We don't bite (hard).

You have nothing to lose but your TWAT cherries!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes Bourne View Post

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Dino.

Also, ceci n'est PAS UNE ROLEX:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

And I believe it's been a while (NSFW): Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

^ NOT FAKE!

+1 excellent pics, Wes. I think Newcomer really likes at least one of those LOL.

To answer your question re: stainless, I would typically try to avoid any refinishing just as a matter of policy, for the reasons you stated. I like a little bit of love to show, whether it's a sport watch or not.

But I would think that a light/superficial touch-up would remove very little steel and would not dramatically affect value.

You see this all the time for instance on VRF, or from respected dealers like Jacek and others, where they just indicate "the case has been refinished, but showing signs of wear" or something along those lines.

But again, there are many collectors who want NO polishing whatsoever, just something as close to untouched as possible.

And also, my Khaki says hi to yours (old pic)...

post #34615 of 48312
^ Yay Khakis!

Yours looks bigger than my 38mm. I like your painted hands better, but I prefer the shape of sub-dial hands on mine.

Very pleased with this purchase so far. Imo, these are the nicest Khaki chrono dials: flat dial with recessed sub-dials. Much nicer than the newer ones where the dial is sorta raised (stepped?) in the middle and glossy. To nitpick: lumed numerals would've been nice, as well as a screw-down crown. Still, a great value for a 7750 chrono with a clean design reminiscent of the IWC 3706 fliegerchrono and Sinn 356.

This is my first 7750 watch and I noticed the minute hand lags behind the seconds. Apparently the 7750 is known for that. Nurd buddy told me it's gear lag and suggested I set the minute hand forward a bit when the seconds are hacked at 12 before pushing the crown back in. Fiddled with it a bit and setting the minute hand 1/3 minute ahead got rid of the lag.
Edited by Wes Bourne - 8/15/14 at 10:24am
post #34616 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Great watch!  IMHO, one of the nicest and easiest to use multi-timezone watches.  

Could not agree more.
post #34617 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith T View Post


+1 excellent pics, Wes. I think Newcomer really likes at least one of those LOL.

Kate Upton what? icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
post #34618 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Kate Upton what? icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

3 thumbs up, as they say.
post #34619 of 48312

Don't be vulgar.

post #34620 of 48312
OK, I have a bit of catching up to do in this thread, so here goes. The number of posts each day seems to be increasing dramatically since the thread started (though not necessarily the amount of actual content), so regrets if I've missed anyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

So, Belli, I have been wondering all day, how do you feel about the new DSSD? Any feelings on the font color biggrin.gif

My previous Steven Seagal sugar-drink comparison wasn't entirely spot-on for the "DEEPSEA" colour, but it conveys my opinion of the watch closely enough, and I stand by my initial reaction. I'm not the biggest fan of the 116660 model in the first place, but it's still very disappointing to see Rolex putting a novelty dial on a stainless professional model. The fade-to-black thing isn't too high on the gimmickry scale compared to some of the joke watches out there, but the conglomerate-owned brands and the novelty-watch assemblers set the bar quite low. This sort of thing harms Rolex's design integrity, in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post

If you had the choice between the SD4000 and the Daytona (modern), which way would you lean? I still have to read the details of your response, but there is a strong urge to own two iconic Chronos.

And I wanted to add, while I don't share every aesthetic preference you do, the you and Belli share your opinions I take another very deep look at my perspective. The watch and design knowledge between the two of you is extremely humbling and helpful. Cheers to the both of you!

Dino summed things up nicely, and I agree entirely with his assessment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Daytona/Sea-Dweller (Click to show)
When it comes to sports watches, I tend to have a bias toward chronographs. Over the years I've owned 8 chronographs, but only 3 diving watches. In addition, back in the mid 90's when the Daytona was my grail watch and they were impossible to find in all steel at MSRP, I sold a 1 year old Sub Date to help pay for a brand new SS Daytona (I was in law school so I had to be careful with my funds). So I suppose that says something about my priorities in terms of watches and life (it meant lots of cheap meals, but I still have that Daytona). I really like the SD 4000 a lot, but I don't spend much time at pools or beaches (and I do have an old Sub LV). That doesn't mean I wouldn't consider an SD4000 at some point. However, if I didn't have a Daytona...I would probably choose it over the SD4000, and get an SD4000 or a vintage diving watch at a later date.

I suppose the question to ask is how much you want a diving watch and would it get lots of use at beaches or pools (not that you can't swim with a Daytona). On the flip side, how often do you use your chronograph, I know some people buy them but never use the chronograph function. Also, do you want diversity of brands but a collection that might start to focus on chronographs? I know guys that just collect chronographs, guys that just collect diving watches, guys that just collect watches of a single brand. So its up to you to decide how you want to build your collection.

Both the Daytona and the SD4000 are great watches. I'd lean in favor of the Daytona if I had neither (perhaps the kid in me favors the gadget look of multiple subdials and being able to activate the chronograph over being able to turn a bezel), but either of them could be the right choice for you. Good luck with whatever you decide.

I also favour chronographs, so I might be a bit biased. But here's my take on the two models.

Despite the Daytona being the default choice for many — not only worn by some of the least-discerning, but also a consistent favourite among watchmakers and serious collectors — it's difficult to beat the overall package that it offers. The versatility and wearability is fantastic, and the design is all chronograph. I have no hesitation about taking mine in water, and do so regularly. There's absolutely no need for the additional pressure resistance a diving-specific model unless you're planning on welding things on the bottom of the North Sea... and that's mostly done by robots these days. A watch with a higher pressure rating won't keep out any more water than a lower-rated one as long as stay with the limit. 100 m is deeper than anyone who's not getting paid a justifiably high day rate to live inside a tiny underwater prison for weeks at a time goes.

DSC_0070.jpg

There just aren't many chronographs, if any, that offer its combination of slimness, movement quality, water resistance, and versatility. The 4130 is both refined and reliable, and though it's a sports movement that isn't about elaborate decoration, it is flawlessly and precisely finished. It's certainly not the rarest or fanciest chronograph available, but it's very solid watch for actually wearing if you like the style.


The chunkier Sea-Dweller is a bit more of a niche watch due to its thickness, but it's essentially a Submariner, which is the other default choice. Even more so than the Daytona, almost anyone with a passing interest in watches has heard of the Submariner, but it's remained in high regard among those who know their stuff ever since its introduction over sixty years ago. I think that the current Submariner is among the best divers' watches available, but prefer the satin dial, slimmer lugs, and raised crystal of the Sea-Dweller.

The raised crystal on the 116600 gives it a distinctive profile compared to the 116610:

DSC_4550.jpg

Many companies make larger fashion divers, but it's substantial watch by reasonable standards, and the density is noticeable. I'm glad that Rolex resisted the temptation to ruin it by bloating the case and turning it into another oversized fashion fashion watch. The 39 mm Explorer, the 42 mm Explorer II, and the "II' versions of the Datejust and the Day-Date are more than enough.

Despite their obvious differences, there are some fundamental similarities between the Daytona and the Sea-Dweller. I'm sure that many people buy either one strictly as jewelry, but in essence, they're meant to be durable, functional watches. I'd consider either to be uncompromised; even if they're not always worn as such, the Daytona is a pure chronograph, and the Sea-Dweller is a pure diver's watch. They both have a raised and beveled crystal, which gives them a resemblance to the classic acrylic models that no other current sports Rolex has. I would consider either to be a no-excuses watch .

Here they are side-by-side. I wouldn't say that one is better than the other; it's strictly a question of personal preference.

IMG_0472.jpg


Fine, but if I had to pick one?

I'd lean toward the Daytona as well, just because I'm irrationally attracted to chronographs, and because the 4130 movement is unique to the model. Also, I use the choronograph function regularly, plus the subtle "click" and tactile response from cycling through stop/start/reset is just sweet. (I'm nerdy like that.) But find that I wear the less-shiny Sea-Dweller more often. Although either could serve as an only watch, I prefer them as a secondary alternative to something more subdued. An older Zenith-movement Daytona with brushed lugs and an all-brushed bracelet would be more of an everyday wearer for me.

I've found that either can be a bit over-the-top at times. (Mind you, my taste in watches is exceptionally curmudgeonly and I tend to think that everything new sucks.) If I had to choose only one watch among my current ones it would be the plexi GMT, as it's less blingy than the Daytona, less bulky than the Sea-Dweller, and can be reasonably understated with a faded black insert.

DSC_4538_002.jpg

dsc8715001.jpg

That said, I have no regrets about either. Just pick whichever one suits you best.

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

Belli, that is one lovely JLC. I hope its new owner gives it the proper love.

Thanks, it's now in Oslo with an appreciative owner who's a proper watch guy. It's a quality watch, it's but it just wasn't really my style. As soon as the Girard Perregaux central-minutes chrono arrived, I picked it over the Reverso every single time. I'm much happier that someone is getting some wear out of that JLC instead of having it languishing in some box. Getting rid of stuff you don't use kicks ass.


I like normal-sized original designs in stainless steel, and although I have nothing against outsourced movements if they're suitable for the watch (whether it's an ETA in a basic watch, or a beautifully-decorated JLC movement in a Royal Oak), I don't like when companies misrepresent their watchmaking abilities or obfuscate their movements' origins. I also like my watches to have a specific niche without too much overlap, so I found the GP and JLC to be redundant, despite one being an automatic chronograph and the other being an 8-day hand-wound GMT. No point in having a watch that doesn't get used, especially when it's a complicated one from a Richemont company.

For some perspective on what I actually wear, here's a photo of a few I had sitting around recently; it's incomplete (the new Sea-Dweller, a couple of GMTs, and other watches are missing) but it should give you an idea of what I like. The Speedmaster is a friend's; I temporarily swapped for a GMT II. It's easily my favourite current Omega and I would gladly have one, but having three chronographs is enough of a maintenance obligation for now.

DSC_4496.jpg

To be honest, I could part with any of them except the plexi GMT and the GP; those two are a bit special to me, and more than enough for any realistic situation. For sentimental reasons, the Sinn chrono will always stick around — plus it's just really good at being a stress-free wristwatch without any bullshit. I like the others fine, but when it comes down to it, they're replaceable and/or forgettable.

Having more than two or three decent watches probably isn't a good idea for normal people, anyway. Really, a single well-chosen watch that complements the wearer's style is more than enough.
Edited by Belligero - 8/15/14 at 6:11am
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...)