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 2347  

post #35191 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by academe View Post

Nuke, Dino & Frills: I take your point regarding value for money; part of why in my own acquisition plans I've concentrated on manufactures like Lange, AP or JLC, rather than on Patek. For 37K, you're entering Lange 1 territory; a watch that I simply love and a true modern icon. For a bit more, you're looking at an 1815 Chronograph (or, "baby" Dato). I suppose my question was more about the relative merits of the 5297 (sector dial or not) versus the 5227. I also wondered after watching the (promotional) videos how difficult it really was to design and craft the hunter's case back. A delightful anachronism, but is really that challenging to design and make?

Agreed with the other guys; buying a new Calatrava just isn't appealing compared to what else is available for that money. You're not the only one who's skeptical about the alleged difficulty of producing that caseback. I call bullshit on the "two years to develop" thing referred to in this Hodinkee advertorial; it's a just a damn hinge, not to mention the fact that hinged backs have been on pocketwatches basically forever. I recently got to play with one on an old Lange pocketwatch and it was freaking exquisite — I can't see this being significantly new or improved. On the other hand, if it actually does take them two years to design something that already exists, then it would explain a lot about some other aspects of certain recent efforts.

Regrets, but I don't care for either the 5297 or the 5227. I find that a date display is poorly-suited to Calatravæ, especially when it looks as dumpy as the one on the otherwise-lovely 324SC movement. For me, the central seconds and the date are out of place on what's supposed to be a dressy watch, and give it more than a hint of entry-level-Seiko flavour. If I was going for that look, then I'd just get a basic Seiko and put the difference toward a less-boring watch that's not as afflicted with identity issues. (Not meant as an insult to Seiko, by the way; their basic watches are unbeatable for the buxx.) The stark whiteness of the date wheel background seems especially lazy against an off-white dial, and the uninspired and unsuited choice (if it even was a conscious choice) of typeface completes the asleep-at-the-drawing-board impression.

Why Patek can't seem to get their shit together with these details is beyond me; on a watch like that, it's the equivalent these shoes....



...worn with a suit.

So if forced to choose, I'd go with the (flawed) sector dial, simply because its more-casual look suffers less on account of the date-display issues. But I see both as fundamentally-compromised choices and I personally would choose something else entirely.

On the plus side, the current Calatrava I don't mind is the 5196 range, especially the platinum version with the gorgeous Breguet numerals:



Again, it would be difficult to justify for the cost, but at least it's not confused about what kind of watch it's trying to be. Strangely enough, even though it's a dressier watch, it would dress down better than any of the current Calatarava-with-date options, which (to me) just look kinda dorky no matter what the context. The 5196 is a good-looking watch that I think will age gracefully, despite the seconds subdial's placement making it a bit obvious that the movement is undersized for the case.

I suppose the way to be satisfied with some of these newer Pateks is to lower your expectations.

:[

I honestly wish I could think of something more positive to say, and I realize it's unfair to single these ones out in a world that includes the likes of Hublot, Romain Jerome and Bremont's gimmick editions. Still, the more I think about it, the more an utter mediocrity like the 5227 makes me wonder why I even bother with watches in the first place. So I will stop giving a shit about that one. It's certainly not the worst watch ever, and it'll probably retain its value in the short to medium term simply due to being a Patek... but I have a feeling that in the future, much of the current range will be considered to be a bit of a historical low point. Let's hope they make a turn for the better.

OK, moving on...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

BP makes a really good watch, but they just aren't something I'd pull the trigger on. I've tried on a few versions of the 50 Fathoms, and I always come away thinking for that amount of $$$ there are other watches I'd rather own. That, and I find them (particularly the one above), a bit stodgy and boring. I don't have any AD's near me now, but years ago when I did they couldn't give them away...you could buy it new from an AD with a 40% discount. They just aren't my thing, but they do make a good watch.

Je ne suis pas fan du Bathyscaphe, non plus. Although presumably designed as a complete watch, it ends up looking like a parts-bin mess. Without getting into too much detail on the subject, that bezel is a prime example of how Arial lameifies everything it touches. (Seriously — it looks like it's straight from some nerd-forum-hawked "microbrand" that either isn't educated enough to know any better, or is stuck with the el-cheapo default font selection of the cut-rate factories that churn their stuff out, and correctly figures that their mall-ninja clients won't notice anyway.) Everything about the date indicator (positioning, alignment, ETA-clone typeface) is just an eyesore, and the elements that constitute the dial and hands seem random and disproportionate. I'm sure the movement's fine, at least. I suppose don't mind the red tip on the seconds hand, either.

Sorry, I just really can't take this thing seriously. It's again unfair to single this one out, as there are certainly far more egregious examples out there, but meaningless pap like this bums me out about the industry. Again, I will resolve not to give a shit. If someone actually likes the look or something, and isn't concerned with servicing costs or long-term appeal, then rock on — it'll tell the time just fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

Hey, Don't Knock Plexi! It's got an appeal of its own... plexi (Click to show)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

Best look away if you don't like Plexi. plexi (Click to show)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Plastic has its place. plexi (Click to show)


I don't see acrylic as a drawback at all. It's tough in its own way, and I find that it just plain looks better on some watches — especially the type I tend to like.

Plexi is sexi. Sapphire is sterile. smile.gif
post #35192 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post

It was a nice summery day today, in a not so summery city, so I decided to go minimal today. This one has a more interesting history than anything else.


Nice one, Hayward.

RAF?
post #35193 of 48312
Belligro: Harsh post. I understand your sentiments about Patek pricing, mine are not so different... However, I suppose I differ from you in that I have always thought, when I have seen the 5227 and 5296 in the metal, that they were very elegant and finely finished. Dimensions for the case and dial, and overall sense of balance, I have thought are excellent. When worn on the wrist, despite their 37-38mm size, they have a great wrist presence. Also movement finishing is just superlative... Walt Odets was not far wrong in holding up Patek movement finishing above all other manufactures...

The 5296 sector dial is difficult to capture in photos. In the metal, I have also thought the two-toned finish causes an interesting play of light, colour and shadow. I also think that - because the majority of Patek coverage is over their complications and the Nautilus/Aquanaut lines - that the simple time-only Calatravas are often poorly represented in online photography. I think there is a danger in basing ones opinions on online images, particularly if there aren't very many high quality images available...

Bit of a ramble, but would I choose a 5227 or 5297 over a Lange 1, 1815 up/down, VC patrimony Traditionelle, or AP Jules Audemars? Not certain... But nor do I think they are as worthless/valueless as do you...

PS I do like that 5196, and - don't shoot me - have even found a place in my heart for the 5123, with it's *ahem* unusual case back.
post #35194 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post

OK, moving on...
Je ne suis pas fan du Bathyscaphe, non plus. 

 

I don't agree entirely: sitting it alongside the original version, it seems like a pretty logical modern homage to its history, and I find it a lot more subtle than the 50 Fathoms.  The oddness of the date window - yes, it brings to mind a Valjoux 7751 chonograph - I actually quite like: being at none of the compass points actually makes it less distracting for me, and I somehow enjoy the peculiarity of it.  I also like the dial, and the proportions of the hands, for all their strangeness, please me.  The first time I saw a picture and review of this watch, I loved it: a proper diver that has historical reference, brand integrity, and is neither some pseudo-militaristic action figure's toy, nor anything at all like a Submariner.

 

And then there's the font thing: in this area, firstly I am easily caught out as my base knowledge of fonts, like most people, is negligible.  I understand (kind of) what you've said about "Arial" before, and on the Patek dials and whatnot, the example you've shown have made sense. But in all honesty, I would never have noticed from four numbers that this was Satan's own typeface.  Of course now I know, I agree that it's unforgivable given the detail normally required in the design of luxury timepieces.  I don't think this looks like a "parts bin special" at all, and I like the retro look of the slimmer bezel to dial proportion.  But yes, now the bezel looks cheap.  You have shat on this successfully in that regard, thank you!

 

But actually, on handling it in person, and being ignorant of the font-that-shall-not-be-named issue, there were two other issues that made it a disappointment: firstly, I don't think it needed to grow to a "modern" 43mm.  This jars with me against the interesting, subtle dial texture and old fashioned slimmer bezel.  39-41mm would have been quite "sporty" enough, and more consonant with the design, I feel.  Also, they gave it a sapphire caseback.  Which is fine - functional diver or not, it's a luxury watch, so having this luxury feature is not incongruous to me: after all, these makers put a lot into movement decoration.  Except they didn't.  I sort of get the matte-black textures on the rotor, although that's a bit lame for me.  But to go to the trouble of inviting a look at the movement, and then leave it looking relatively boring and functional, seems silly to me.

 

All in all, I still like the idea and the style of this watch - fonts notwithstanding.  But of course Dino, as usual, is right: even with 30-40% off easy to find, there is a lot of competition out there.  And if it were a bit smaller i.e. the size as subtle and retro as the concept, and if it had either a prettier movement, or a more authentic steel caseback - choose one, dammit - then it would stay firmly on my wish list whatever the TWATterati might think.  But, as a mere mortal, who's never bought anything nearly that expensive, and definitely won't in the near future, it would have to be perfect.  And it ain't.

post #35195 of 48312
I dont like that platinum Calatrava at all. Too many circles and just full of meh for me.

Fwiw, I dont like the 5296 or the 5227 either, stylistically. I just dont think they are pretty. The selling point of any dress watch like that, for me, especially a Calatrava, is being pretty. I mean, for a gold, thin, 2 or 3 handed watch, thats really all its about imo, being pretty.

I will say though that the case shape and the back on the 5227 is exquisite, I just hate the dial.
post #35196 of 48312
As a follow up though, in this pic I like the 5227 quite a bit, and while I am at it, a few more Calatravas that I enjoy:

Sidebar, we just purchased a 5022 (pic #2) yesterday.










post #35197 of 48312
I have always had a soft spot for the hobnail bezelled Calatravas. Beautiful simplicity. Want to pick one up someday. icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

Is there a number associated with that type?
post #35198 of 48312
Beautiful calatravas , my vote is for the one second from top!
post #35199 of 48312
Stitchy: Is that a 5123 at the bottom? I love the dial. Not sure about the caseback and lugs...They need to develop a bigger hand-wound movement!
post #35200 of 48312
So I just learned about the Tudor Black Bay Blue version that just came out... preeeeeeettttty sweet watch. Did not like the original Black Bay with the red/rose/cream stuff, but this one is great. Thoughts?
post #35201 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Moo View Post

So I just learned about the Tudor Black Bay Blue version that just came out... preeeeeeettttty sweet watch. Did not like the original Black Bay with the red/rose/cream stuff, but this one is great. Thoughts?

I like the blue on the bracelet.

I like the red on a burgundy shell strap (for obvious reasons to me).

The strap is a little beat up in this pic, but you get the idea.

 

post #35202 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by PartagasIV View Post

I have always had a soft spot for the hobnail bezelled Calatravas. Beautiful simplicity. Want to pick one up someday. icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
Is there a number associated with that type?

There are a number of them, some with seconds sub dial, some without....

I believe the one I have pictured above is the 3919.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farhad19620 View Post

Beautiful calatravas , my vote is for the one second from top!

icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

Ours will be ready for sale in about 3 weeks. spam[1].gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by academe View Post

Stitchy: Is that a 5123 at the bottom? I love the dial. Not sure about the caseback and lugs...They need to develop a bigger hand-wound movement!

Indeed that is a 5123. Agreed, Love the dial, but the caseback and lugs not as much. Now, put that 5123 dial on the 5227 case and Im inlove.gif .
post #35203 of 48312
Are these fake Rolexes or what!!!

qateremy.jpg
post #35204 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Moo View Post

So I just learned about the Tudor Black Bay Blue version that just came out... preeeeeeettttty sweet watch. Did not like the original Black Bay with the red/rose/cream stuff, but this one is great. Thoughts?

I like both colors very very much. i think blue looks better on bracelet and red looks better on a nice leather strap.
post #35205 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

As a follow up though, in this pic I like the 5227 quite a bit, and while I am at it, a few more Calatravas that I enjoy:







 

I like the looks of the 5022, but I'd never purchase that one or a hobnail like the 5119/3919.   Those lugs are a very weak design.  They are too small, and just sodiered on, and if you accidentally hit it against a doorway the lugs are prone to breaking off completely.  I was at my local AD when a customer brought in a 5119, he had accidentally bumped against a doorway, and the lug was broken off from the case.  The AD was just going to sent it to be reattached, but they said they have seen that issue several times with that case design because its just a small piece that is welded on.  If going for a Patek, I would only get a Patek where the lug was more integrated into the case or a lot more solid then what is on the 5119/3919.   

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PartagasIV View Post

I have always had a soft spot for the hobnail bezelled Calatravas. Beautiful simplicity. Want to pick one up someday. icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

Is there a number associated with that type?

5119 or 3919, but beware, if you are tough on watches choose a different model, the lugs on those are literally a weak point.  See above.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by academe View Post

Bit of a ramble, but would I choose a 5227 or 5297 over a Lange 1, 1815 up/down, VC patrimony Traditionelle, or AP Jules Audemars? Not certain... But nor do I think they are as worthless/valueless as do you...

 

There are lots of great Pateks, and we all have different taste.  One choosing a 5227 or 5297 over a Lange 1, sorry, but that's no competition...the Lange 1, is (regardless of Walt Odet's opinion about finishing) a far better finished watch than a Calatrava.  Don't get me wrong, the Calatrava is really nice, and the finish is great...but the Lange is a notch above them.  I think its tough to compare a VC Patrimony Traditionelle to a Calatrava, as the Calatrava is substantially more expensive...I like the looks of the VC more, but I think I like the movement of the Patek more.  The Jules Audemars Ultra Thin vs. a Calatrava...I'd probably take the AP over the 2 you mentioned, but if it were a different Calatrava maybe I would choose the Patek.  Anyway, just my thoughts on a few watches you mentioned.  Again, wishing you and your Dad luck and lots of fun. 

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...)